Saturday, May 24, 2014

There will be a Celebration
of the Life of Nat Weinstein on Sunday, June 22, from 1 to 4 p.m. in
San Francisco. The celebration will be at SEIU 1021's Union Hall at 350
Rhode Island St. The entrance is on Kansas Street, between 16th and
17th. (The Building is marked 350 Rhode Island on the Kansas side too.)
There will be remembrances by family members and life-long comrades of
Nat and an open mic for those who wish to share appreciations and
memories of Nat's life. He was a fighter for socialism to the end.
Refreshments will be served.

Nat Weinstein ¡Presente!

October 3, 1924—May 9, 2014

Nathan Weinstein was born in Brooklyn in 1924. His mother
was a Russian-Jewish immigrant, his father an American-born son of
Russian-Jewish immigrants. He married Sylvia Mae Profitt in 1944 and joined the
Socialist Workers Party in 1945. He served as a Merchant seaman during World
War II from 1943-1945. He first learned about socialism in 1945 aboard a
Merchant ship. For the rest of his life he devoted himself to his family
and to the socialist cause. He participated in the civil rights movement,
especially defending Robert Williams and Malcolm X, and was a supporter in the
U.S. of the Cuban Revolution. He was active in the Painters Union both in New
York and in San Francisco and participated in many labor struggles throughout
his life. Nat was an editor of Socialist
Viewpoint magazine, where many of his writings were published, including
analyses of the Cuban Revolution, the fall of the Soviet Union, the nature of
the Chinese state and the power of the united front of workers. Nat was also a
decorative painter and an artist. Besides baseball, pool and pinochle, he loved
a good political debate. Nat is survived by his daughters Bonnie and Debbie Weinstein,
Bonnie’s husband, Jack Biancalana, her son Kevin Sheppard and his wife Maria
Sheppard, her son John A. Gould, and Debbie’s son, Reshad Karboau. To his whole
family and his many friends and comrades Nat Weinstein represented the best
tradition of the militant, class-conscious socialist worker. Messages and
comments can be sent to Bonnie Weinstein at giobon@comcast.net,
Carole Seligman at caroleseligman@sbcglobal.net, or call Socialist
Viewpoint at (415) 824-8730 for more information.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Chelsea Manning SF Pride Contingent 2014http://www.facebook.com/events/298467196976692/June 28/29 Celebration Civic CenterJune 29 Parade Market StreetThis year we have more reason to celebrate the SF Pride 2014 parade in SanFrancisco: Heroic WikiLeaks whistle-blower Chelsea Manning is being honoredas an official Grand Marshal! March with us to show your pride in Chelsea!

Organized by the Chelsea Manning Support Network and Courage to Resist.Endorsing organizations include War Resisters League-West, CODEPINK Womenfor Peace, CivSol, and the Brass Liberation Orchestra.

Please contact us to include your organization as an endorser!

A motorized cable car will be available for participants with mobilitylimitations.

For further details, please contact farah@couragetoresist.org*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Click
on the youtube link to watch the presentation by Mphumzi Maqungo,
Treasurer of NUMSA (NATIONAL UNION OF METAL WORKERS OF SOUTH AFRICA)The Struggle Of Labor In South Africa And NUMSA's Call For A Workers Partyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBGSYvnYVOo&feature=

South African National Union of Metal Workers treasurer Mphumzi Maqungospoke on May 3, 2014 in Berkeley, California about the political and socialdevelopments in the South African labor movement. His union has called forthe resignation of the ANC Zuma government after the massacre in Marikanaand is organizing to launch a mass workers party in South Africa that iscommitted to carrying out the Freedom Charter previously passed by the ANCbut abandoned by the present ANC government. The meeting was sponsored bythe Transportation Workers Solidarity Committee TWSC and the May DayCommittee In Solidarity With South African Workers.

For more information on NUMSA go to:www.numsa.za.orgFor information on the Transport Workers Solidarity Committeewww.tranportworkers.org Production of Labor Video Project www.laborvideo.org

It is immensely ironic that a private publishIng
company is claiming the copyright of the collected works of Karl Marx
and Friedrich Engels, the philosophers who wrote against the monopoly of
capitalism and its origin, private property, all their lives.

Marxists Internet Archieve
is an internatioanl, public archieve which gives free access to a wide
range of academic and historical writings about Marxism in multiple
langauges. Lawrence & Wishart
is a private publishing house in Britain which claims to hold the
copyright of Marx Engels Collected Works. During the last several years,
the Marx Engels Collected Works
have been read by the millions of people on the Marxists Internet
Archeive (MIA). However, now the private publishing company, Lawrence
& Wishart - which loves to position itself as a 'radical company',
claiming historical links with the Britain's Communist Party - has
directed MIA to delete all texts originating from Marx Engels Collected
Works (MECW).

If this happens, MECW would not be accessible on
the internet for free, from 30th April, 2014, and that would be a huge
loss for the students and political activists who continue to utilize
this free academic source.

You cannot privatize their writings
-- they are the collective property of the people they wrote for.
Privatization of Marx and Engels' writings is like getting a trademark
for the words 'socialism' or 'communism'.

Say NO to the
copyright law for the founders of scientific socialism. Let's protest
against Lawrence & Wishart for this ironic monopoly.

It is a matter of a serious concern for us that you have directed the
Marxists Internet Archive to delete all the writings from Marx Engels
Collected Works. As an organization which has been affiliated with the
Britain's Communist Party in the past and which is known for publishing
progressive literature, that's low!

We urgently demand you to take back this nasty, capitalistic
decision and let the collected works remain a collective source of
knowledge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/21/business/us-snooping-on-companies-cited-by-china.html?hp
WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency has never said what it was seeking when it invaded the computers of Petrobras, Brazil’s
huge national oil company, but angry Brazilians have guesses: the
company’s troves of data on Brazil’s offshore oil reserves, or perhaps
its plans for allocating licenses for exploration to foreign companies.

Nor
has the N.S.A. said what it intended when it got deep into the computer
systems of China Telecom, one of the largest providers of mobile phone
and Internet services in Chinese cities. But documents released by
Edward J. Snowden, the former agency contractor now in exile in Russia,
leave little doubt that the main goal was to learn about Chinese
military units, whose members cannot resist texting on commercial
networks.The agency’s interest in Huawei, the giant Chinese maker of
Internet switching equipment, and Pacnet, the Hong Kong-based operator
of undersea fiber optic cables, is more obvious: Once inside those
companies’ proprietary technology, the N.S.A. would have access to
millions of daily conversations and emails that never touch American
shores.

Then there is Joaquín Almunia, the antitrust commissioner
of the European Commission. He runs no company, but has punished many,
including Microsoft and Intel, and just reached a tentative accord with
Google that will greatly change how it operates in Europe.

In
each of these cases, American officials insist, when speaking off the
record, that the United States was never acting on behalf of specific
American companies. But the government does not deny it routinely spies
to advance American economic advantage, which is part of its broad
definition of how it protects American national security. In short, the
officials say, while the N.S.A. cannot spy on Airbus and give the
results to Boeing, it is free to spy on European or Asian trade
negotiators and use the results to help American trade officials — and,
by extension, the American industries and workers they are trying to
bolster.

Now, every one of the examples of N.S.A. spying on corporations around the world is becoming Exhibit A in China’s
argument that by indicting five members of the People’s Liberation
Army, the Obama administration is giving new meaning to capitalistic
hypocrisy. In the Chinese view, the United States has designed its own
system of rules about what constitutes “legal” spying and what is
illegal.

That definition, the Chinese contend, is intended to
benefit an American economy built around the sanctity of intellectual
property belonging to private firms. And, in their mind, it is also
designed to give the N.S.A. the broadest possible rights to intercept
phone calls or email messages of state-owned companies from China to
Saudi Arabia, or even private firms that are involved in activities the
United States considers vital to its national security, with no regard
to local laws. The N.S.A. says it observes American law around the
globe, but admits that local laws are no obstacle to its operations.

“China
demands that the U.S. give it a clear explanation of its cybertheft,
bugging and monitoring activities, and immediately stop such activity,”
the Chinese Defense Ministry said in a statement released on Tuesday. It
was part of a broad Chinese effort to equate what China’s Unit 61398
does — the cyberwar
operation named in the indictment of five unit members that was
announced Monday — with what the N.S.A. does.Petrobras is a case in
point. In the American view, Brazilian energy policy is made inside the
state-run company, which is indistinguishable from the government. Thus,
under the same rationale that the United States intercepted the phone
calls of the country’s president, Dilma Rousseff, it had the authority,
as a collector of foreign intelligence, to delve inside the company. Ms.
Rousseff, denouncing the N.S.A. at the United Nations last September,
said that the agency’s activities amounted to “a breach of international
law and an affront” to Brazil’s sovereignty.

In fact, state-run
oil companies are a fascination to the N.S.A. just as American high-tech
firms are a Chinese obsession. State oil companies in Saudi Arabia,
Africa, Iran and Mexico have often been intelligence targets for the
United States. American officials say that digging inside corporations
for insights into economic policy is different from actually stealing
corporate secrets.

“What we do not do, as we have said many
times,” James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence,
said after some of the initial N.S.A. revelations last year, “is use our
foreign intelligence capabilities to steal the trade secrets of foreign
companies on behalf of — or give intelligence we collect to — U.S.
companies to enhance their international competitiveness or increase
their bottom line.”

One reason for that policy, officials say, is
that unlike the Chinese they would not know which companies to help:
Apple but not Dell? Google but not Yahoo?But in the case of Mr. Almunia,
the stream of data intercepted by the N.S.A. was most likely highly
company-specific. Mr. Almunia was dealing with antitrust issues
involving Apple, Motorola Mobility, Intel and Microsoft.

It is
unclear what, if anything, those companies gleaned from American
officials who had access to the resulting intelligence. But former
intelligence officials say the companies are walled off from any
intelligence that might help them compete.

American officials
sometimes dig into corporations because they are suspected to be witting
or unwitting suppliers of technology to the North Koreans or the
Iranians. Siemens, the German telecommunications firm, was the chief
supplier of the factory controllers that ran the centrifuges in Iran’s
main nuclear enrichment plant at Natanz. The Stuxnet computer worm,
designed by the United States and Israel, was designed to attack Siemens
equipment — and it has never been clear whether the company knew that
its machines were under American and Israeli attack. But in that case,
American officials could argue that national security, not corporate
competitiveness, was the goal.

In contrast, when Unit 61398 went
after Westinghouse and Alcoa, it was to steal trade secrets and
strategies to enter the Chinese market.

But other elements of the
indictment, some outside experts say, could give the Chinese the
opportunity to turn the rationale of the Justice Department against its
own government. Some of the supposed Chinese online espionage against
the United Steelworkers union and a solar energy firm, SolarWorld, appeared intended to gain intelligence about trade complaints.

Jack
Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor who served in the Justice Department
under the George W. Bush administration, wrote on the Lawfare blog on
Tuesday that that “sounds a lot like the kind of cybersnooping on firms
that the United States does.”

Andrew W. Lehren contributed reporting from New York and James Glanz from Washington.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

2) Uncovered Papers Show Past Government Efforts to Drive Gays From Jobs

WASHINGTON
— Days after President Lyndon B. Johnson’s election to his first full
term, an administration official asked a subordinate to explain the
policy on firing gays. In particular, he wondered whether someone with a
history of gay liaisons could, through years of marriage, be
“rehabilitated” into a trustworthy civil servant.

The response
came quickly, and in language that would be shocking by today’s
standards. Technically, rehabilitated gays could keep their jobs. But
John W. Steele, a staff member of the Civil Service Commission, which
handled personnel matters for the government, said that seldom happened.

“Some
feel that ‘once a homo, always a homo,’ ” Mr. Steele wrote. He added,
“Our tendency to ‘lean over backwards’ to rule against a homosexual is
simply a manifestation of the revulsion which homosexuality inspires in
the normal person.”

It was November 1964. Four months earlier, the president had signed the landmark Civil Rights Act
banning discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex and national
origin. The policies laid out in Mr. Steele’s memo would continue for
more than another decade.

It is well known that America’s laws
and policies, in the name of morality and national security, barred gays
from the federal work force for much of the previous century. But
documents newly obtained by a gay-rights group offer new details about
the views that drove the government’s sometimes obsessive effort to
identify and fire gays in government jobs.

Memos like Mr.
Steele’s, and formerly classified documents on an F.B.I. program called
Sex Deviate, provide stark evidence of how for decades the government
considered gay men and women to be immoral, and not to be trusted with
even the most mundane bureaucratic tasks.

“These memorandums were not meant for the outside world to see,” said Charles Francis, a gay-rights advocate with the Mattachine Society of Washington. “It’s a tide of human indignation.”

For
the past two years, Mr. Francis has been collecting documents on the
government’s anti-gay policies, filling a gap that he sees in the
archives of the gay-rights movement. Groups such as the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Historical Society in San Francisco and the Rainbow History Project
in Washington have collected volumes of personal records, photographs
and objects. But mining government documents has typically been the
purview of scholars.

Mr. Francis, working with pro bono lawyers at one of the nation’s largest law firms, McDermott, Will & Emery,
has used public-records requests to collect hundreds of documents in
which gays or policies toward them were discussed. The government has
identified thousands more, and Mr. Francis says he plans to someday make
the records public as part of what he calls “archive activism.”

“Gay and lesbian history is often ignored or deleted,” he said. “It didn’t happen.”

For
instance, while much has been written about the F.B.I.’s first and most
influential director, J. Edgar Hoover, and his hunt for communists and
his suspicion of the civil rights movement, little attention has been
paid to his effort to unmask gays in government and academia.

“There
were two obsessions at the F.B.I. One was communism. The other was
gays,” said Douglas M. Charles, a Pennsylvania State University
professor who is writing a book on the F.B.I. and gays and who
independently reviewed some of the same documents that Mr. Francis
examined.Under Mr. Hoover’s Sex Deviate program, the F.B.I. collected
information on people suspected of being gay and passed it on to
government agencies and, sometimes, the news media. The F.B.I. had a
network of informants, including doctors, helping alert the authorities
to what was seen as a growing national security threat, Dr. Charles
said.“The Seat of Government has been receiving an increasing number of
reports, arrest records, and allegations concerning present and past
employees of the United States Government, who assertedly are sex
deviates,” a 1951 F.B.I. memo states.

Dr. Charles said the F.B.I.
incinerated 330,000 pages of documents related to the program in 1977,
leaving behind only a few scattered records. So efforts by people like
Mr. Francis to make public the remaining documents, along with documents
from elsewhere in government, are invaluable to historians and
researchers, he said.

The Sex Deviate program came on the heels of a 1950 Senate report calling for a crackdown on gays in government. The report declared them immoral, emotionally unstable security risks.

“Many
civilian agencies of government have taken an entirely unrealistic view
of the problem of sex perversion and have not taken adequate steps to
get these people out of government,” the report declared.

Soon after President Dwight D. Eisenhower took office, he issued Executive Order 10450,
which authorized investigations into, among other things, sexual
perversion in the federal work force. The order was intended to ensure
the “suitability” of federal employees. The government cited suitability
in 1957 when it fired Franklin E. Kameny as an astronomer. Mr. Kameny
went on to be a leader in the gay-rights movement. Before his death in
2011, Mr. Kameny donated his papers to the Library of Congress and received an apology from the Obama administration.

It
was in the government’s suitability files that Mr. Francis found the
memo from Mr. Steele. While the government clearly labeled files
concerning Communism and counterespionage, documents related to gays
were not so neatly identified, Mr. Francis said.

The government’s
anti-gay climate claimed the job of the White House aide Walter
Jenkins, one of Johnson’s most trusted advisers. He resigned in 1964, a
month before the Civil Service Commission memo, after being arrested on
disorderly conduct charges in a Y.M.C.A. restroom with another man.
Johnson suspected his longtime friend had been framed.

“I
couldn’t have been more shocked about Walter Jenkins if I’d heard that
Lady Bird had killed the pope,” he said later. “It just wasn’t
possible.”

In 1975, in the face of lawsuits and protests, the
government rescinded its policy that being gay, by itself, was enough to
justify being fired. Today it is unlawful for the federal government to
fire employees based on sexual orientation.

There is, however,
no federal law prohibiting discrimination by private employers.
Advocates have pushed for such a measure for years and repeatedly have
called on President Obama to ban, by presidential decree, discrimination against gays who work for federal contractors.

Paul
M. Thompson, a lawyer working with Mr. Francis, said that he was
surprised at how stark the government’s language against gays was for so
long. “And we’re just now struggling with whether there’s a need to
protect people in the workplace,” he said.

JERUSALEM — A human rights group circulated a video on Tuesday that renews questions about last week’s killing of two Palestinian teenagers by Israeli forces during a West Bank demonstration.

The video,
taken from a security camera belonging to a business in Beitunia, a
West Bank town outside Ramallah, was edited and promoted by Defense for Children International-Palestine Section
and shows two youths felled by apparent gunfire on Thursday about an
hour apart in a sparsely populated concrete expanse shrouded by a cloud
of smoke. Neither of the teenagers appeared to be engaged in provocative
behavior at the time they were shot, though a photograph shows one
wearing a black ski mask, and the video shows another individual hurling
stones from the same spot seven minutes before the first shooting.Hanan
Ashrawi, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s executive
committee, condemned Israel’s “deliberate execution” of the teenagers,
calling the shootings “crimes against humanity under international law”
and demanding “immediate action” by the United Nations and the European
Union. Rifat Kassis, executive director of Defense for Children
International, said “neither child presented a direct and immediate
threat to life at the time of their shooting” and urged Israel to
“conduct serious, impartial, and thorough” inquiries to “hold the
perpetrators accountable for their crimes.”

Lt. Col. Peter
Lerner, a spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces, said Tuesday that
investigations by the military and the police were continuing, and that
“the preliminary inquiry up until this moment still does not indicate
any use of live fire by the forces.” Colonel Lerner said that the few
minutes of edited video footage did not capture the “atmosphere of
violence” during the demonstration, and he noted that it did not show
who fired the shots or whether they were rubber bullets or live
ammunition.

“So what caused the deaths,” he said, “is a question mark that needs to be answered.”

A top United Nations official on Tuesday called for an “independent and transparent” investigation into the deadly shootings.

Oscar
Fernández-Taranco, the assistant secretary general for political
affairs, told the Security Council on Tuesday that Israel should “ensure
that its security forces strictly adhere to the basic principles on the
use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials.”

The
deaths occurred on Nakba Day, in which Palestinians commemorate the
destruction of scores of Arab villages around the founding of the state
of Israel in 1948. The Israeli military said that 150 people had
gathered for the demonstration outside Ofer prison — where more than 100
Palestinians had been on a hunger strike for weeks to protest their
detention — and that they had hurled stones and firebombs and ignored
orders to disperse.

“There was a substantial riot that took
place,” Colonel Lerner said. “Our forces used riot-dispersal means and
crowd-control methods to limit and prevent the riot from causing any
damage.”

Palestinian health officials say that Nadeem Siam
Nawara, 17, and Mohammad Mahmoud Odeh Salameh, 16, were killed by live
ammunition. (They originally provided an incorrect age for Mohammad.)

B’Tselem,
an Israeli human rights group, said in a statement on Tuesday that it
had reviewed video from four security cameras and consulted medical
experts who said the entry and exit wounds on the victims were
“completely consistent with injuries caused by live fire and could not
have been caused by rubber-coated metal bullets.” The statement said
B’Tselem’s investigation raised “grave suspicion that the killing was willful.”

Fakher
Zayed, who owns the building where the security camera was mounted,
said in an interview that accompanies the footage on the video that he
had heard live ammunition — “four shots to be exact” — and that “the
shooting was not from the same side where the boys were throwing rocks
at the beginning.”

“The army had fired plenty of tear-gas
canisters, and the youth retreated back toward the gas station,” Mr.
Zayed said. “At the moment of the killings, nothing was going on and no
stone-throwing was taking place. Actually, the youths were moving back.”

Every once in a while, science asks a simple question and gets a straightforward answer.

In this case, yes, they will. And not only mice, but also rats, shrews, frogs and slugs.

True,
the frogs did not exactly run, and the slugs probably ended up on the
wheel by accident, but the mice clearly enjoyed it. That, scientists
said, means that wheel-running is not a neurotic behavior found only in
caged mice.

They like the wheel.

Two researchers in the
Netherlands did an experiment that it seems nobody had tried before.
They placed exercise wheels outdoors in a yard garden and in an area of
dunes, and monitored the wheels with motion detectors and automatic
cameras.

They were inspired by questions from animal welfare
committees at universities about whether mice were really enjoying
wheel-running, an activity used in all sorts of studies, or were instead
like bears pacing in a cage, stressed and neurotic. Would they run on a
wheel if they were free?

Now there is no doubt. Mice came to
the wheels like human beings to a health club holding a spring
membership sale. They made the wheels spin. They hopped on, hopped off
and hopped back on.

“When I saw the first mice, I was extremely happy,” said Johanna H. Meijer at Leiden University Medical Center
in the Netherlands. “I had to laugh about the results, but at the same
time, I take it very seriously. It’s funny, and it’s important at the
same time.”

Dr. Meijer’s day job is as a “brain
electrophysiologist” studying biological rhythms in mice. She relished
the chance to get out of the laboratory and study wild animals, and in a
way that no one else had.

She said Konrad Lorenz, the
great-grandfather of animal behavior studies, once mentioned in a letter
that some of his caged rats had escaped and then returned to his garden
to use running wheels placed there.

But, Dr. Meijer said, the Lorenz observation “was one sentence.”

For
the experiment, the wheels were enclosed so that small animals could
come and go but so that larger animals could not knock them over. Dr.
Meijer set up motion sensors and automatic video cameras. Several years
and 12,000 snippets of video later, she and Yuri Robbers, also a Leiden
researcher, reported the results. They were released online Tuesday in
the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Gene
D. Block, chancellor of the University of California, Los Angeles, was
not involved with the paper but knows Dr. Meijer and had seen the wheel
set up in her garden. He said the study made it clear that wheel-running
is “some type of rewarding behavior” and “probably not driven by stress
or anxiety.”

Mice accounted for 88 percent of the wheel-running
events, and spent one minute to 18 on the wheel. The other animals each
accounted for less than 1 percent. Frogs, though there were very few,
were seen to get on the wheel, get off and get back on.

Russell
Foster, a circadian rhythm researcher at Oxford University, said he read
the paper and sent it out to other scientists on behalf of the
Proceedings and was delighted when peer reviews from other scientists
were positive.

Marc Bekoff, a professor of ecology and
evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado who is active in the
animal welfare movement, said in an email that he thought the paper did
show that wheel-running could be a “voluntary activity,” but that mice
in labs may be doing more of it because of the stress of
confinement.“Wild bears will often pace back and forth,” he wrote, “but
in captivity, the rate of doing it seems to be greatly heightened.”

As
to why the mice, frogs or perhaps even slugs run, or move, on the
wheel, Dr. Meijer said she thought that “there is an intrinsic
motivation for animals, or should I say organisms, to be active.”

Huda
Akil, co-director of the Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience
Institute at the University of Michigan, who has studied reward systems,
said: “It’s not a surprise. All you have to do is watch a bunch of
little kids in a playground or a park. They run and run and run.”

Dr.
Akil said that in humans, running activates reward pathways in the
brain, although she pointed out that there are innate differences in
temperament in all sorts of animals, including humans. Rats that do not
like to run can be bred. And plenty of people do all they can to avoid
jogging, cycling and elliptical machines.

Presumably, the same
is true of wild mice. While some were setting the wheel on fire with
their exertions, others, out of camera range, may have been sprawled out
on the mouse equivalent of a lounge chair, shaking their whiskers in
dismay and disbelief.

SAN
QUENTIN, Calif. — It is not every newspaper editor who can point to a
black-and-white surveillance photograph from a 1996 bank robbery and say
that he was the robber.

But then again, The San Quentin News
— which was recently honored by a chapter of the Society of
Professional Journalists for “accomplishing extraordinary journalism
under extraordinary circumstances” — is hardly a typical newspaper.

Founded
in 1940 and then revived as a serious journalistic enterprise six years
ago, the monthly News, which bills itself as “The Pulse of San
Quentin,” is the state’s only inmate-produced newspaper and one of the
few in the world. The paper’s 15 staff members, all of them male felons,
write from the unusual perspective of having served an estimated 297 ½
years collectively for burglary, murder, home invasion, conspiracy and,
in one case, a Ponzi scheme.

In a notorious prison best known for
its death row, the men are committed to what Juan Haines, the
56-year-old managing editor, who is serving 55 years to life for that
1996 bank robbery, calls “boots on the ground” journalism, accomplished
without cellphones or direct Internet access. “It’s about being heard in
a place that’s literally shut off from the world,” he said.

From
their newsroom trailer next to the prison yard, where inmates work out
amid spectacular views, the reporters and editors delve into issues at
“the Q,” as San Quentin State Prison
is sometimes called, as well as those far beyond its walls. They have
covered a hunger strike, crowding in California’s women’s prisons and a
federal court order concerning mental health care for California death
row inmates.

But the paper specializes in stories that can be
written only by journalists with a “uniquely visceral understanding of
the criminal justice system,” said Arnulfo T. Garcia, the paper’s editor
in chief, who is serving 65 years to life for a long list of crimes
that includes burglary, robbery and skipping bail to flee to Mexico.

Lately,
the paper seems to be gathering momentum. Editors, who sometimes work
through dinner over ramen noodles, are talking about expanding the
current circulation of 11,500. Students from the Center for Nonprofit and Public Leadership
at the University of California, Berkeley, have helped them develop a
12-year business plan that would increase the number of paid subscribers
to help subsidize the free copies for inmates.

This year, the
Northern California chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists
gave The San Quentin News one of its James Madison Freedom of
Information Awards.

Some people find the possibility of a higher profile alarming. Marc Klaas, president of the KlaasKids Foundation,
whose 12-year-old daughter, Polly, was kidnapped at knife point from a
sleepover and murdered in 1993, said that he was “vehemently opposed” to
an inmate-produced publication being accessible to the public.

“These
men are behind bars for a reason — so we can be protected from them,”
Mr. Klaas said. “I don’t think that criminals serving time should have
the opportunity to influence the hearts and minds of law-abiding
citizens.” Richard Allen Davis, convicted in 1996 in the murder of Polly Klaas, is on death row at San Quentin.

Robert
L. Ayers Jr., a former San Quentin warden who retired in 2008, said
that positive outlets were important for prisoners. He said he decided
to revive the publication as a quality journalistic endeavor rather than
what he called an “inmate rant rag.”“When they get involved and see
they’re accomplishing something, that could be the one positive tick
mark in the ‘good’ column for them,” he said. In learning how to write,
he added, “they start expressing themselves in ways other than physical
or violent means.”

The paper’s recent coverage has included an
article about an inmate who was denied a compassionate release (“Judge
Slams the Door on Cancer Patient, 81”) and a profile of transgender
inmates that highlighted the lack of availability of bras at men’s
prisons.

One inmate on the staff, Glenn Padgett, 50, said that
his work felt redemptive. “I’m just trying to give back, to deal with
the rips and tears I’ve made in the universe,” said Mr. Padgett, known
as Luke, who, at age 33, stabbed a man to death and set fire to his home
to cover up the killing.

Prison officials vet all the content.
This year, the news operation was suspended for 45 days after a
photograph of a Shakespearean play performance was swapped without
approval. This prompted Watani Stiner, a columnist, to write, “We are
once again reminded that we are prisoners first and journalists second.”
(Mr. Stiner, 66, escaped in 1974 from San Quentin, where he was serving
a life sentence for conspiracy to commit murder in the shooting deaths
of two Black Panthers, and fled the country. Asked by a visitor how he
escaped, he replied, “Real fast.”)

Like a small-town paper — San
Quentin has a population of 3,855 — The News covers sports (including
the San Quentin Giants and the A’s), arts and entertainment, new babies
born to the paper’s advisers, folksy holiday greetings and
man-on-the-street interviews, San Quentin-style. “We can go right into
the yard and get a quote about how inmates are affected by policy
decisions,” Mr. Haines, the managing editor, said. Its issues are
typically 20 pages and are available online. A yearly subscription costs
$40 for members of the public.

The paper is distributed to 17
prisons in addition to San Quentin, where it is considered a must-read
by correctional officers. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
does not pay for printing or distribution; the paper survives on
grants, donations and subscriptions. A team of outside volunteer
advisers — including students from the Graduate School of Journalism at
the University of California, Berkeley, led by William Drummond, a
former Los Angeles Times reporter — provides editorial and research
assistance. So does Richard Lindsey, a former staff member who was
paroled last year and now combs through studies from the Vera Institute
of Justice, the Pew Research Center and other sources on the web. He
delivers his research on a flash drive to the prison’s public
information officer, who passes it on to the paper’s staff.

“The
leading public health problem in prison is boredom,” said Franklin E.
Zimring, a law professor and criminologist at the University of
California, Berkeley. The newspaper, he said, “is an operational
antidepressant that keeps its participants structured and
psychologically well organized.”

Inmates are often drawn to
stories that prompt self-reflection. In an interview, one correctional
officer described a call he had received from a friend who said, “Your
baby’s dead.” That was how the officer had learned that his 19-year-old
son had been murdered in a case of mistaken identity.

“I know I
was out there perpetuating the same hate,” said Richard Richardson, a
news designer who was convicted of a gang-related home invasion and
other crimes. “I don’t want people to think we’re not thinking about our
victims. Because we are.”

(Reuters)
- Fast-food workers from three dozen U.S. cities on Wednesday will
protest at the headquarters of McDonald's Corp, calling for a
significant wage hike, as company shareholders also prepare to weigh in
on the pay of the fast-food giant's top executives.

The latest, and possibly largest, protest against the global chain comes a day ahead of a shareholders vote on executive pay at McDonald's, where Chief Executive Don Thompson took home total compensation of $9.5 million in 2013.

Low-wage
U.S. restaurant and retail workers are calling for a rough doubling of
pay to $15 per hour and the right to unionize. Their frequent protests
have helped fuel a national debate on income inequality at a time when
many middle- to low-income Americans are struggling to make ends meet.

Jessica
Davis, a 25-year-old McDonald's crew trainer with two children, said
CEO Thompson is earning his millions on the backs of working mothers and
fathers.

Davis, who works at a company-owned McDonald's in
Chicago, says she earns $8.98 per hour and works part-time despite
requests for more hours.

"We need to show McDonald's that we're
serious and that we're not backing down," said Davis, who plans to join
Wednesday's protest.

McDonald's, which is grappling with sagging
U.S. sales and profit-crimping beef price spikes, does not disclose
average pay for restaurant workers, most of whom work for McDonald's
franchisees.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 3.5
million fast-food and counter workers in the United States earn a
median hourly wage of $8.83, or almost $18,400 per year based on a
40-hour work week without vacation.

Demos, a public policy think
tank in New York, said fast-food workers are the U.S. workforce's lowest
paid occupation. A Demos report found that the CEO-to-worker
compensation ratio for the fast food industry was more than 1,000-to-1
in 2013.

Chipotle Mexican Grill shareholders, in a non-binding
vote, on May 15 came down more than 3-to-1 against the advisory pay
proposal from the popular burrito seller, where co-CEOs Steve Ells and
Monty Moran received total 2013 compensation of $25.1 million and $24.4
million, respectively.

U.S. President Barack Obama has pushed
Congress to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour from the
current $7.25, a move fought by Republicans in Congress.

Twenty-one
states and Washington, D.C. have minimum wages higher than the federal
minimum wage, and 38 states have considered minimum wage bills during
the 2014 session, according to the National Conference of State
Legislatures.

RUSTENBURG
South Africa (Reuters) - The chanting began around midnight, a chilling
message through the cold of the early South African winter to those who
had dared to cross the picket lines at platinum producer Lonmin.

"The
rats must come out of their holes. We are going to kill this NUM," the
crowd chanted as it approached the home of 'Mary', a member of the
National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) who had kept working at Lonmin when
the rival Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (AMCU) was
on strike.

Her real name cannot be revealed because she fears for her life.

"I
heard singing in the distance. I thought I was actually dreaming, but
it was getting nearer and nearer," said Mary, who spoke to Reuters at an
undisclosed location.

The events she related unfolded outside
her home near Lonmin's Marikana mine on May 14, which the London-listed
company had declared a "return to work day" in the hope of persuading
enough people to end the crippling AMCU strike.

The 17-week
stoppage, which has also hit Anglo American Platinum and Impala
Platinum, did not end that night; AMCU members blocked roads, extending
the longest and costliest industrial action in South African mining
history.

Fear is proving a potent weapon for the AMCU as it holds out for wage increases that the mining houses say they cannot afford.

Four
NUM members were hacked or beaten to death in the run-up to May 14, and
when Mary overheard someone at work - an AMCU "spy", she feared -
muttering "we must remove her head", she thought she could be next.

A fifth NUM member was stabbed to death on his way to work at an Anglo American Platinum mine on Thursday.

TRAUMATISED CHILDREN

When
the crowd of 50 men in green AMCU t-shirts gathered at the end of her
street - most carrying clubs, others scythes - they chanted the names of
NUM members.

"I live in a circle, like a dead-end street. They
stood there and they started humming and saying that the rats must come
out," Mary said, still shaken as she recalled the moment her three
daughters, the eldest 13, awoke to the noise.

"Then they started
pointing at the houses because most of us NUM people live in that
street. I've got three children. They were all at home, and they were
traumatised."

Mary's husband was also there, but he is a mine
supervisor and not an NUM member, giving him some degree of cover. "I'm
the one who's a target because I am an NUM member," Mary said, still
wearing blue overalls after a day shift.

Eventually the crowd
drifted away to join a larger group marching around the mine in their
bid to prevent workers breaking the strike, but not before its message
had sunk in.

NUM sources say the union now has 15 members living
in safe houses around the platinum belt town of Rustenburg, 120
kilometres (70 miles) northwest of Johannesburg. They go to work under
the protection of private security guards.

TURF WAR, CLASS WAR

AMCU
denies it uses violence and intimidation, and police have made no
arrests in connection with the five recent murders, but on May 14
thousands of AMCU members stopped others from returning to Lonmin's
shafts.

Reuters journalists at AMCU rallies in Marikana have also
routinely heard members chanting "What is this NUM? We must kill this
NUM."

At such gatherings, AMCU members often greet the media with hostile stares or refuse to speak to reporters.

AMCU
emerged as the biggest platinum union in 2012 after poaching tens of
thousands of NUM members in a turf war in which dozens of people were
killed.It, too, has lost members, not least when police gunned down 34
wildcat strikers at Marikana in August 2012, the bloodiest security
incident since the end of apartheid in 1994.

Since then, NUM says
46 of its members have been murdered, and even though 40 arrests have
been made, police have secured no convictions, and suspects accused of
violence have often been released on bail, General Secretary Frans
Baleni said.

"We have seen cases where the police do not act, and
if they do act, the justice department fails and people get bail," he
told Reuters.

A police spokesman said they knew the ring leaders
behind the latest wave of intimidation but have made no arrests. He did
not explain why.

AMCU leaders have tapped a deep vein of
discontent among black miners who feel they are still not getting a fair
share of South Africa's mineral wealth, making its fight an extension
of the struggle against the continuing inequalities that are a legacy of
apartheid.

Its charismatic president, Joseph Mathunjwa,
frequently portrays the strike as an all-out battle against injustice,
the "platinum cabal" and the "capitalists". Strike-breakers such as Mary
are painted as sell-outs to the forces of oppression.

"Even
though I am in a safe house now, I still get nightmares. I'm on sleeping
pills and anti-depressants. I get anxiety attacks," she said, adding
she may be forced to quit and move back to her native Eastern Cape.

Although she said she loved her job, it was not something she was prepared to die for.

BANGKOK
— Two days after declaring martial law the Thai military on Thursday
seized full control of the country, the second time in a decade that the
army has overthrown an elected government.

The military, which
had invited political leaders Thursday for a second day of talks on how
to resolve the country’s political deadlock detained the meeting
participants instead. The head of the army, Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha then
announced the coup on national television, saying it was “necessary to
seize power.”

Mr. Prayuth said the coup was launched “in order to
bring the situation back to normal quickly” and to “reform the
political structure, the economy and the society.”Six months of
debilitating protests in Thailand have centered on whether to hold
elections. The governing party dissolved Parliament in December in an
attempt to defuse the crisis and set the election for February. The
opposition Democrat Party, which has not won a national election since
1992, refused to take part. Protesters called for an appointed prime
minister and blockaded polling stations, leading to a court ruling that
the election was unconstitutional.The country’s democracy was in
deadlock.

General Prayuth made the coup announcement Thursday flanked by senior military officers.

Supporters
of the former government of Yingluck Shiniwatra, a group known as red
shirts, who were holding a demonstration Thursday on the outskirts of
Bangkok, were dispersed by soldiers in black masks. The Thai media
reported that their leaders were arrested.

The last coup in Thailand was in 2006 and was followed by more than a year of military rule.

Thousands
of antigovernment protesters remained on the streets at dusk but
leaders warned the crowds that the military was on its way. “The
military is coming but do not panic,” said Samran Rodpetch, a protest
leader.

In Thailand’s turbulent political history, the king,
Bhumibol Adulyadej, has on at least one occasion helped resolve
political disputes. But he is 86 years old and ailing.General Prayuth
said in his announcement that the king was “above the entire conflict.”

The military “will protect and worship the monarchy,” he said.

General Prayuth referred to the people staging the coup as the “The national peacekeeping committee.”

Antigovernment
demonstrators have sought to eradicate the country’s most powerful
political family, the Shinawatras. The country’s politics have been
turbulent since 2006, when the military removed Thaksin Shinawatra, the
patriarch of the family, who founded a populist movement that has won
every election since 2001.

Mr. Thaksin, whose power base was in
the provinces, challenged the power of the Bangkok establishment, a
clash that was at the root of the conflict. Mr. Thaksin lives overseas
but remains very influential in Thai politics.

The coup announcement was made after the Thai stock market was closed.

OAK
BROOK, Ill. — McDonald's CEO Don Thompson sought to address a growing
chorus of critics on issues including worker pay, marketing to children
and animal rights at its shareholders meeting Thursday.

Thompson
stressed that the company has a heritage of providing job opportunities
and wasn't predatory or focused on marketing to children.

"We are people. We do have values at McDonald's. We are parents," Thompson said.

A
day earlier, McDonald's closed one of its buildings in Oak Brook,
Illinois, where hundreds of protesters had planned to demonstrate over
the low wages paid to its workers.

Protesters targeted another
site on the company's headquarters in suburban Chicago, and more than
138 were arrested for refusing to leave the property.

The protesters were out again before the meeting Thursday, chanting "I want, I want, I want my $15."

Shawn
Dalton, 59, traveled from Pittsburgh, saying she wanted to support
fast-food and minimum-wage workers. Dalton said her daughter is a recent
high school graduate who can't afford to go to college right away, so
she'll likely wind up earning Pennsylvania's $7.25-an-hour minimum wage.

Inside
the meeting, individuals affiliated with Corporate Accountability
intended to once again bring up the company's marketing to children.
Last year, the group made headlines after it arranged to have a
9-year-old girl ask Thompson to stop "tricking" kids into eating
McDonald's food.

McDonald's representatives didn't immediately
respond when asked if they planned to change the way it conducts its
question-and-answer period this year. In past years, people have been
able to stand and directly address executives.

Shareholder
meetings offer a rare opportunity for average investors to face top
executives at publicly traded companies. Public pension funds and
activist groups often show up in hopes of changing corporate practices.

The McDonald's meeting is a frequent target because of the company's high profile.

(Reuters) - McDonald's Corp shareholders on Thursday overwhelmingly approved an advisory measure on executive pay at the fast-food chain, where Chief Executive Officer Don Thompson took home total compensation of $9.5 million in 2013.

Nearly
94 percent of shares were voted in favor of the measure, the company
said at its annual meeting in Oak Brook, Illinois. With their
non-binding vote, shareholders approved how much compensation McDonald's
executives received as well as the formulas used to calculate that pay.

The
vote came as the chain wrestles with market share losses to U.S.
rivals, profit-squeezing spikes in beef costs, criticism from some
parents and public health experts over its food and advertising, and
noisy protests over the low pay of hourly workers.

Chipotle
shareholders offered a scant 23 percent support for a similar advisory
pay proposal on May 15. Steve Ells and Monty Moran, co-CEOs of the
popular burrito chain, received total 2013 compensation of $25.1 million
and $24.4 million, respectively.

Shares in McDonald's were roughly unchanged at $102.53 in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

WASHINGTON — A Federal District Court judge late Thursday lifted an order
that had barred the military from force-feeding a hunger-striking
Guantánamo detainee, and sharply rebuked the Obama administration for
refusing to compromise over procedures she said caused “agony.”

Judge Gladys Kessler said in a three-page ruling that she faced “an anguishing Hobson’s choice” involving the detainee, Jihad Ahmed Mujstafa Diyab:
to keep the order in place as the fight continues and risk that he
dies, or to lift it and allow the military to take steps to keep him
alive using procedures that inflict “unnecessary” suffering.

The
force-feeding procedure involves strapping a detainee into a chair and
inserting a tube through his nose and down his throat. Liquid
nutritional supplement is then poured into his stomach.

Mr.
Diyab, a Syrian who has been held without charges at Guantánamo for
nearly 12 years, was recommended for transfer in 2009-10 by a task
force. But officials fear repatriating him amid the chaos in Syria. The
president of Uruguay has offered to allow him to be released there, but
so far the Obama administration has not done so.

A long-term
hunger striker, Mr. Diyab had been refusing food or water since Judge
Kessler barred force-feeding him a week ago, and his condition was
“swiftly deteriorating,” she wrote.

Mr. Diyab’s challenge to the
military’s procedures for force-feeding hunger striking detainees is the
first of its kind. Last year, Judge Kessler ruled that she lacked
authority to intervene on such matters while sharply criticizing the
military’s procedures as “painful, humiliating and degrading.” But
earlier this year, a federal appeals court ruled that the judiciary does
have authority to review conditions of confinement at Guantánamo.

Judge
Kessler had asked the military to negotiate a compromise over its
procedures with the detainee and his representatives while the
litigation unfolded.

She wrote that Mr. Diyab had asked to be fed
at the base hospital without being strapped into the restraint chair
and without having the feeding tube reinserted and then removed for each
cycle, sparing him the “agony” of that procedure.

If he could
have been fed in that manner to prevent him from committing suicide by
starvation, “it would have then been possible to litigate his plea to
enjoin certain practices used in his force feedings in a civilized and
legally appropriate manner,” she wrote. “The Department of Defense
refused to make these compromises.”Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, a Pentagon
spokesman, did not directly address Judge Kessler’s criticism that the
Defense Department would not compromise on its procedures. He said that
the department would not allow detainees in its custody “to commit
suicide” and that it used “enteral feeding in order to preserve life.”

On
Thursday, Cori Crider and Courtney Busch, two members of Mr. Diyab’s
defense team, filed a series of allegations relayed from Mr. Diyab
related to the force-feeding practices. Among other things, they told
the court, he alleged that the medical staff sometimes overfed detainees
to the point of discomfort.

Mr. Diyab further alleged
that another hunger-striking detainee, Ahmed Rabbani, started to bleed
on April 29 when the medical staff tried to intubate him, leading to
“extremely painful swelling in his nose and throat.” As a result, he
said, he “developed a bad chest infection and had been vomiting blood
over the previous few days.”

The New York Times cannot independently verify those allegations. Mr. Diyab’s defense team recently learned that some videotapes of forcible cell extractions and force feedings
of Mr. Diyab and other detainees exist, and at a hearing on Wednesday
Judge Kessler ordered the military to turn 34 such tapes of Mr. Diyab
over to his lawyers.

But Mr. Diyab’s statements, as relayed in
the Thursday filings, said that the tapes may not show everything. He
said the medical staff and guards turn the cameras off
when they are forcing the tube into him, and only turn them on when he
has stopped resisting. But he claimed that a recent session of Mr.
Rabbani vomiting blood was probably caught on camera.

When
the Occupy protests spread across the country three years ago, state
and local law enforcement officials went on alert. In Milwaukee,
officials reported that a group intended to sing holiday carols at “an
undisclosed location of ‘high visibility.’ ” In Tennessee, an
intelligence analyst sought information about whether groups concerned
with animals, war, abortion or the Earth had been involved in protests.

And
in Washington, as officials braced for a tent encampment on the
National Mall, their counterparts elsewhere sent along warnings: a link to a video of Kansas City activists
who talked of occupying congressional offices and a tip that 15 to 20
protesters from Boston were en route. “None of the people are known to
be troublemakers,” one official wrote in an email.

The
communications, distributed by people working with counterterrorism and
intelligence-sharing offices known as fusion centers, were among about
4,000 pages of unclassified emails and reports obtained through freedom
of information requests by lawyers who represented Occupy participants
and provided the documents to The New York Times. They offer details of
the scrutiny in 2011 and 2012 by law enforcement officers, federal
officials, security contractors, military employees and even people at a
retail trade association. The monitoring appears similar to that
conducted by F.B.I. counterterrorism officials, which was previously reported.In
many cases, law enforcement officials appeared to simply assemble or
copy lists of protests or related activities, sometimes maintaining
tallies of how many people might show up. They also noted appearances by
prominent Occupy supporters and advised other officials about what — or
whom — to watch for, according to the newly disclosed documents.

The
files did not show any evidence of phone or email surveillance;
instead, much of the material was acquired from social media, publicly
disseminated information and reports by police officers or others. While
a Homeland Security bulletin in October 2011 warned that protests could
be disruptive or violent, some civil liberties advocates are concerned
about the monitoring of lawful political activities tied to the Occupy
movement. Homeland Security officials acknowledged that the movement,
which criticized the financial system as undemocratic, was “mostly
peaceful.”

“People must have the ability to speak out freely to
express a dissenting view without the fear that the government will
treat them as enemies of the state,” said Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the
Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, which obtained the documents.

The
nation’s 78 fusion centers — which have received hundreds of millions
of dollars from the Department of Homeland Security and other federal
agencies, as well as money from state governments — are run by state and
local authorities. They were created after the 2001 Qaeda attacks to
share information about terrorism or other national security threats,
but have provided little of value related to that mission, a Senate subcommittee report
concluded in 2012. Many centers, which can involve dozens of officials
from police and fire departments, federal agencies and private
companies, now focus on more routine criminal activity.

Peter Swire, a law and ethics professor at Georgia Tech who recently served on President Obama’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies,
said that as the government concentrated on fighting terrorism,
guidelines that had restricted the monitoring of political activity were
relaxed. As a result, he said, even minor offenses like trespassing
“can be enough to trigger surveillance of political groups.”

Marsha Catron, a spokeswoman for Homeland Security, said that the fusion
centers play an important role in helping law enforcement and emergency
responders understand how to protect people during large public events.
She added that the centers are required to protect privacy and civil
liberties. Agencies receiving Homeland Security grants must follow
guidelines similar to those adopted by that department, which forbid the
collection of information “solely for the purpose of monitoring
activities protected by the U.S. Constitution, such as the First
Amendment-protected freedoms of religion, speech, press, and peaceful
assembly and protest.”

The documents show that people connected
to the centers shared information about individual activists or
supporters, and kept track of those who speculated in social media
postings that the centers had been involved when police departments used
force to clear Occupy camps.

They also make clear that the centers appeared to take varying approaches to the protests. An intelligence officer at the Delaware center
responded to an inquiry about Occupy with an email that said, “Our
fusion center has distanced itself from the movement because of 1st
Amendment rights and because we have not seen any criminal activity to
date.”

Other centers distributed information about the protests,
sometimes describing arrests or disruptive tactics, but often listing
apparently lawful, even routine activities.

A center in Nevada
regularly sent out reports from more than a dozen cities that included
descriptions of uneventful demonstrations and a “rally for jobs and justice” with the Rev. Al Sharpton.
Officials circulated descriptions of plans in Seattle for an
anti-consumerist flash mob to dance to the rock anthem “Invincible.”
Others monitored Facebook pages, noting events like a meditation led by
Buddhist monks or a student march with participants dressed as “zombie
bankers.”The Boston Regional Intelligence Center,
one of the most active centers, issued scores of bulletins listing
hundreds of events including a protest of “irresponsible lending
practices,” a food drive and multiple “yoga, faith & spirituality”
classes.

The reports also listed appearances by people including a professor at the Harvard Divinity School, the linguist Noam Chomsky and an official at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, who was to discuss the Patriot Act.
Some reports noted that a man scheduled to join in a teach-in at Dewey
Square had written a film about Sacco and Vanzetti and wondered whether
he was “a known/respected figure within the anarchist movement.” Others
described Bill McKibben,
an environmentalist and scholar at Middlebury College, stating,
“McKibben organized a sit-in near the White House in August of this year
to protest construction of a pipeline,” and was arrested but not
charged.

At times, fusion center officials shared information
produced by what Homeland Security calls “private sector partners.” For
instance, the head of the Washington police department’s intelligence
fusion division sent an email to colleagues before Thanksgiving
2011 with an order to develop a “one-page product” to acquaint
commanders with “the potential threat” described in a 31-page report
prepared by the International Council of Shopping Centers.The report
examined protesters’ “attitude towards retail,” suggested that business
could be disrupted on the day after Thanksgiving and listed several
“specific known threats.” They included credit card detractors equipped
with scissors at malls and posters offering “help for people who want to
put an end to mounting debt and extortionate interest rates with one
simple cut” and a group of people who had declared on a website that
they would “intentionally forgo the shopping frenzy.”

Cathy L.
Lanier, chief of the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, said
that officials who shared the report might have done so simply to
prepare for all eventualities. “I wouldn’t consider anything in there as
a threat,” she said. “But I can see the implications for planning
purposes.”

Military employees also shared Occupy material. Two
Defense Department employees, for example, regularly sent information to
the fusion center in Washington or to a federal official connected to
the center. One of them, an intelligence research specialist working in
the threat analysis center of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency,
circulated an email describing Google searches as “a very handy intel
gathering tool” to keep tabs on Occupy protests. The other employee,
assigned to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, which addresses weapons
threats, forwarded an email that included a link to an essay titled
“What Police Should Be Learning From the Occupy Protests.”

Before
distributing the message, the employee asked the sender whether it was
“safe” to visit the site without hiding his computer’s identity.

On
Wednesday afternoon, a man named Everton Wagstaffe stood outside his
cubicle in a dormitory at Greene Correctional Facility, a
medium-security prison in Coxsackie, N.Y., 120 miles north of New York
City.

For three hours, according to an account Mr. Wagstaffe gave
to his family and lawyer, he watched as a corrections officer
methodically searched the room, big enough for only a twin bed and a
locker. Scant attention, if any, was given to his personal belongings,
his toiletries and clothing.

Instead, the officer went through every page of Mr. Wagstaffe’s legal papers, a mighty stack reflecting years of litigation.

Mr.
Wagstaffe, 45, is in the 22nd year of a 25-year maximum sentence for a
kidnapping that led to the death of Jennifer Negron, 16, in the East New
York section of Brooklyn. From the beginning, he has maintained his
innocence and, during the last decade, has turned down multiple chances
to walk free because they came with requirements that he express remorse
for the crime.

An investigation of the convictions of Mr.
Wagstaffe and his co-defendant, Reginald Connor, has been underway for
about a year by a special unit in the Brooklyn district attorney’s
office, following reports in The New York Times
of two new witnesses who support the men’s claims of innocence. State
appellate judges heard arguments in December on their motion for a new
trial.

So why were Mr. Wagstaffe’s files searched?

A
spokesman for the state’s Corrections Department cited a general
directive that said supervisors could authorize searches only if there
was “reasonable suspicion” of contraband. Mr. Wagstaffe has had no
disciplinary infractions in more than a decade, and only minor ones —
like being late to a prisoner count — before then. The search yielded
nothing, state authorities said.

The Brooklyn district attorney’s office claims no credit or blame for the search.

During
a visit with Mr. Wagstaffe last year, he told me that he had fought to
keep his bearings over the decades by reviewing every syllable committed
to paper about the case and by soaking up works of philosophy and
literature. His reading included “A Confession,” Leo Tolstoy’s memoir of
his struggles with midlife despair.

“What is my life about?” Mr.
Wagstaffe asked. “All this stuff, all this evidence of innocence, has
been brought forth, and I think, ‘Yes, this is it — straight to the
point, no way around it.’ But here I am, all these years later.”

Mr.
Connor, who also insists on his innocence, accepted parole, including a
condition that he register as a sex offender, strictly limiting where
he can work and live.

Ms. Negron was apparently forced into a car
after midnight on Jan. 1, 1992. Around dawn, her body was discovered
about a mile away, beaten and partially stripped. There was evidence of a
struggle; her hand clutched strands of someone else’s hair. Years after
the convictions, DNA tests showed that the hair and scrapings from
under the victim’s fingernails did not come from either Mr. Wagstaffe or
Mr. Connor.Like many crimes during that violent era, the investigation
relied on an informant and threadbare supporting evidence. Mr. Wagstaffe
and Mr. Connor were identified by a single witness — the informant — a
troubled woman who supported her addiction to crack with prostitution.
Held in a hotel by the authorities to ensure her court appearance, she
testified that she saw Mr. Wagstaffe drag Ms. Negron from the sidewalk
outside her home and force her into the front of a car driven by Mr.
Connor. The witness also testified that a third man was in the back
seat, but no one else was ever charged.

Her account was
buttressed by the discovery of a car that she and another witness
testified they had seen Mr. Connor in earlier that night. An aunt of the
dead girl testified that a headband in the back seat was very much like
the one worn by her niece.

But the detectives kept no records of
interviews with the owner of the car, and the defense lawyers did not
speak with her. After the conviction, the owner said that she and her
daughters had taken the car to a New Year’s church vigil and that it had
not been moved the entire night.

An alibi witness, whose name
Mr. Wagstaffe provided within minutes of being arrested, says she was
never interviewed by detectives, prosecutors or defense lawyers until
last year, after she had spoken with me for an About New York column.

“I
have to generate patience and perseverance,” Mr. Wagstaffe said, adding
a biblical citation: “ ‘Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the
evidence of things not seen.’ ”

A
man who had shot to death his four young children, for reasons known
only to him, sat in the wooden chair reserved for him at the Riverbend
Maximum Security Institution in Nashville. His body was strapped tight
and his head was freshly shaved, to enhance the conductivity.

I
could see him, but he could not see me. We sat perhaps 30 feet apart, on
opposite sides of a one-way glass partition that separated those who
would walk away that September night in 2007 from one man who would not.

The
electric chair had not been used in Tennessee since 1960, a reflection
of a nation’s discomfort with a procedure that had come to be seen as
gruesome, if not cruel. But the condemned man, Daryl Holton, 45, had
been given a choice between lethal injection and electrocution. To the
dismay of prison officials, he had chosen the latter — again, for
reasons known only to him.After he imparted some final, cryptic words,
his scalp was dampened with salted water that dripped down his impassive
face and onto his white cotton shirt. A leather cap lined with copper
mesh was placed on his head. A power cable was attached to that cap.

Then
a small black shroud was affixed to that leather cap, covering his
face. I still do not know whether this was to protect a last shred of
his dignity, or to keep us witnesses from seeing the face of a
state-administered death.

Soon, 1,750 volts shot through the
inmate’s body; it lurched and dropped, as the shroud faintly fluttered.
Another jolt followed. Then flutter-free stillness.

For a
generation now, the electric chair, dogged by gruesome accounts of
botched electrocutions, has been generally displaced by lethal injection
as this country’s preferred form of execution. But the recent scarcity
of lethal-injection drugs has prompted some death-row states, including
Utah and Wyoming, to consider retro-style solutions. Firing squads, for
example.

But Tennessee made the first concrete move this week by
effectively dusting off its electric chair, which has not been used
since the execution of Mr. Holton, and which is said to contain oaken
pieces dating to the gallows.

On Thursday, Tennessee’s Republican
governor, Bill Haslam, signed into law a bill that allows for
electrocution if the drugs for lethal injection are not available. The
governor has not elaborated on his reasoning. But his spokesman, David
Smith, said in an email that the bill had passed overwhelmingly in the
Tennessee General Assembly, with the legislature feeling strongly “that
the state should have an alternative option if lethal injection was not
available.”

Electricity, by contrast, is never in short supply.

Tennessee’s
decision is breathtakingly regressive, according to Deborah W. Denno, a
professor at Fordham University School of Law and a national expert on
capital punishment. States have historically gone to new methods of
execution, she said, from hanging to electrocution, to lethal gas, to
lethal injection.

“But they’re going backwards,” Ms. Denno said
of Tennessee. “They’re going back to using a method of execution that
was basically rejected because it was so problematic. That’s never
happened before.”

The first execution by electrocution was of a
convicted murderer, William Kemmler, in New York in 1890. News accounts
described the singeing of hair, the charring of flesh where electrodes
had been attached. It was botched.Still, for generations afterward, the
electric chair loomed in the public consciousness as the ultimate
deterrent, so powerful that lights dimmed when the switch was thrown.
The Chair: a piece of furniture designed without comfort in mind, and
nicknamed “Old Sparky” even by many of those who had to take a seat.

But
society grew uneasy with The Chair. When the method of lethal injection
was introduced in the late 1970s, states began rushing to this
death-penalty alternative — in part because it was considered to be
cheaper and more humane.

The troublesome electrocutions
continued, with flames shooting out of one man’s head in Florida, and
blood pouring from another’s eyes and nose in Virginia.

In 1999, Florida’s electrocution of Allen Lee Davis
— convicted of murdering a pregnant woman and her two young daughters —
caused blood to pour from his face and burned his head and body. When
the United States Supreme Court made plans to explore the case, Florida
quickly passed a law to allow death-row inmates to opt for lethal
injection.

And, in 2008, the Supreme Court of Nebraska — the last state in which electrocution was the sole form of execution — declared the electric chair
to be cruel and unusual punishment. Writing for the majority, Justice
William M. Connolly said, “The evidence shows that electrocution
inflicts intense pain and agonizing suffering.”

Electrocutions,
by choice of the condemned person, have continued in a few states. Since
Mr. Holton’s death in 2007, there have been four: the last in January
2013, in Virginia.

But in recent months, lethal injections have fallen under increasing scrutiny. States have had difficulty obtaining the necessary drugs
— a scarcity created in part by European drug manufacturers that are
declining to have their medications oil the apparatus of death.

Just
last month, Oklahoma halted a lethal injection in mid-execution when
the condemned man, a convicted killer named Clayton D. Lockett, began writhing in pain. He died a short time later.

Even
against this disturbing backdrop, Tennessee’s decision to revert to the
electric chair seems regressive, given the practice’s long, ugly
history.

“This is a method that the states themselves got away
from, and I think for good reasons,” said Richard C. Dieter, the
executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. “They were
seen as barbaric, and this could lead to more censure, more public
discomfort, more legal challenges.”

“The attempt is to keep executions going,” he added. “But it might have a reverse effect.”

On
that long-ago night in Nashville, procedures were followed to the
script of a 68-page document called “Execution Procedures for
Electrocution.”

The blinds to the witness room dropped. The power
cable was disconnected. A physician confirmed the death. And a
disembodied voice announced that the sentence had been carried out, so
please exit.

The witnesses filed out into the hazy, early-morning
darkness. We gathered in a scrum to compare notes on what we had seen
and, in my case, not yet comprehended.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

15) Leaving Islam for Atheism, and Finding a Much-Needed Place Among Peers
By MARK OPPENHEIMER

MAY 23, 2014

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/24/us/leaving-islam-for-atheism-and-finding-a-much-needed-place-among-peers.html?ref=us
ALEXANDRIA,
Va. — Women talked about “coming out,” being open with their families,
leaving “the closet” at a conference here this month. But the topic was
not sexuality. Instead, the women, attending the third Women in Secularism conference were talking about being atheists.
Some grew up Catholic, some Jewish, some Protestant — but nearly all
described journeys of acknowledging atheism first to themselves, then to
loved ones. Going public was a last, often painful, step.

Anyone
leaving a close-knit belief-based community risks parental
disappointment, rejection by friends and relatives, and charges of
self-loathing. The process can be especially difficult and isolating for
women who have grown up Muslim, who are sometimes accused of trying to
assimilate into a Western culture that despises them.

“It was
incredibly painful,” Heina Dadabhoy, 26, said during a discussion called
“Women Leaving Religion,” which also featured three former Christians
and one formerly observant Jew, the novelist Rebecca Newberger Goldstein. “My entire life, my identity, was being a good Muslim woman.”

Ms.
Dadabhoy, a web developer who lives in Orange County, Calif., and who
often gives talks about leaving Islam, said the hardest part of the
process was opening up to her family.

“The sense they got was
where I was turning my back on them,” Ms. Dadabhoy said. Her parents
accused her of thinking that she was better than her grandparents and
other ancestors. “You think what you have is better than what we have?
You think you’re like those white people,” Ms. Dadabhoy recalled them
saying.

There are few role models for former Muslims, and
although the religion’s history contains some notable skeptics, very few
of them are women. Today, Muslim feminists like Irshad Manji and Amina Wadud
advocate more liberal attitudes toward women in Islam, but neither has
left the faith. And many atheists resist identifying with Ayaan Hirsi Ali,
the Somali-American (by way of the Netherlands) whose vehement
criticism of Islam is seen, even by many other atheists, as harsh.

One group that seeks to bridge that gap is Ex-Muslims of North America,
which had an information table in the exhibition hall. Members of the
group, founded last year in Washington and Toronto, recognize that their
efforts might seem radical to some, and take precautions when admitting
new members. Those interested in joining are interviewed in person
before they are told where the next meeting will be held. The group has
grown quickly to about a dozen chapters, in cities including Boston,
Chicago, Houston, New York and San Francisco.

One of the group’s
founders who was at the conference, Sadaf Ali, 23, an Afghan-Canadian,
said that she had once been “a fairly practicing Muslim.”

During
childhood, she said, “I was always fairly defiant.” As she grew older,
she struggled with depression, and she thought that praying more and
reading the Quran would help. She became more religious and looked
forward to a traditional life. “I thought my life was sort of set out
for me: get married, have children,” Ms. Ali said. “I might go to
school. I’ll have a very domestic life. That’s what my family did, what
my forefathers did.”

But as a university student, her feelings
began to change.“As I started to investigate the religion, I realized I
was talking to myself,” Ms. Ali said. “Nobody was listening to me. I had
just entered the University of Toronto, and critical thinking was a big
part of my studies. I have an art history and writing background, and I
realized every verse I had come across” — in the Quran — “was
explicitly or implicitly sexist.”

Quickly, her faith crumbled.

“So
in 2009, I realized there probably is no God,” she said. “What is so
wrong in having a boyfriend, or having premarital sex? What is wrong
with wanting to eat and drink water before the sun goes down during
Ramadan? What is so wrong with that? I couldn’t handle the cognitive
dissonance anymore.”

For the next three years, Ms. Ali thought of
herself as an agnostic. She stopped practicing Islam. She still had
Muslim friends, and her brother married into a religious Muslim family.
Slowly, younger friends and relatives figured things out. “They didn’t
seem to care that I wasn’t Muslim,” Ms. Ali said. “But I didn’t go
around telling my parents.”

Eventually, her parents heard.

“They
were incredibly upset, as they believe in an eternal hell,” Ms. Ali
said. “They are O.K. with me for the most part being irreligious,” she
added. “But we don’t talk much about it anymore, and that’s fine.”

The
members of Ex-Muslims are adamant that they respect others’ right to
practice Islam. The group’s motto is “No Bigotry and No Apologism,” and
text on its website is inclusive: “We understand that Muslims come in
all varieties, and we do not and will not partake in erasing the
diversity within the world’s Muslims.”

But they are equally
adamant that it is still too difficult for Muslims inclined to atheism
to follow their thinking where it may lead. Whereas skeptical Christians
or Jews can take refuge in reformist wings of their tradition,
religious Muslims generally insist on the literal truth of the Quran.

“I
would say it’s maybe 0.1 percent who are willing to challenge the
foundations of the faith,” said Nas Ishmael, another founder of the
Ex-Muslims group who attended the conference.

So those who do
challenge the foundations can feel isolated. According to Ms. Ali and
her colleagues in Ex-Muslims of North America, they frequently hear from
others, who say, “I thought I was the only one.”

When Ms.
Dadabhoy “came out” to her parents, “it didn’t go so well,” she said.
“They reacted the way they knew how, which was to freak out. They had
never heard of anybody leaving Islam. We were raised with the idea you
can’t leave, that nobody can leave. Leaving Islam was something somebody
incredibly deranged would do. Or if forced at sword point or gunpoint.”

Critics
have accused her of being part of a Zionist conspiracy to make Islam
look bad. “I say, ‘If I am, where is my paycheck?’ ” Ms. Dadabhoy said
drolly.

For a time, Ms. Dadabhoy’s parents took her to imams,
hoping to talk her out of her apostasy. “And they would just give me
tautological beliefs,” she recalled. “ ‘You are blessed to be born with
Islam.’ And I would say, ‘But if I had been born a Christian, you’d be
saying the same thing, but for Christianity.’ Once I spent four hours
talking with this imam, and his conclusion was, ‘Just have faith because
you should have faith.’ ”

At this point, Ms. Dadabhoy’s absence
of belief is as ineluctable as the imam’s faith: “It’s less that I won’t
buy it, which sounds really woeful, than that I can’t.”

This year we have more reason to celebrate the SF Pride 2014 parade in SanFrancisco: Heroic WikiLeaks whistle-blower Chelsea Manning is being honoredas an official Grand Marshal! March with us to show your pride in Chelsea!

Organized by the Chelsea Manning Support Network and Courage to Resist.Endorsing organizations include War Resisters League-West, CODEPINK Womenfor Peace, CivSol, and the Brass Liberation Orchestra.

Please contact us to include your organization as an endorser!

A motorized cable car will be available for participants with mobilitylimitations.

For further details, please contact farah@couragetoresist.org*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

C.
SPECIAL APPEALS AND

ONGOING
CAMPAIGNS

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

AN URGENT FUNDRAISER FOR LYNNE STEWART'S

MEDICAL NEEDS CONTINUES
http://lynnestewart.org/

LYNNE STEWART HAS JUST BEEN DENIED

MEDICAL BENEFITS. SHE CAN'T RE-APPLY UNTIL JULY!

SHE IS IN URGENT NEED OF OUR HELP NOW!

Because
of a determined people’s movement, Lynne is finally home with her
family. But she has urgent medical needs and costs. Lynne’s Stage 4
breast cancer spread a year ago to both lungs, back, bones and lymph
nodes. Now 74, she has lost weight and has trouble breathing; doctors
estimate her lifespan at 12 months. Lynne will soon begin treatment
requiring her to pay deductibles and co-payments. To boost the odds,
she’ll use a special diet, vitamins, and other healing methods – some
costly and none covered by insurance.
Lynne’s spirit is indomitable – help her fight to survive!

Tell Maj. Gen. Buchanan why Chelsea deserves to be free!

PVT Chelsea Manning has served nearly four years in prison, yet she’s
showing a remarkable spirit of persistence. She is unjustly imprisoned,
but not defeated. With plans to enroll in a prelaw/political science
university program, and a legal name change underway, she continues
planning for her future and working to fulfill her dreams. She is
determined to make the best of her situation. However, we know she could
contribute more to the world if she was free.Please write a letter to Convening Authority Major General Buchanan today urging him to reduce Chelsea’s sentence!
We began collecting letters to include in PVT Manning’s clemency
packet last fall. We expected that the military would finalize her
record of trial last December, and that she could then submit her
application to Maj. Gen. Buchanan by the end of 2013. Just like so many
times before, however, the military’s process has slowed Chelsea’s
ability to defend her rights. Defense attorney David Coombs now
estimates that it will be at least another month before the clemency
application can be submitted.
Want to make sure decision-makers know why you believe Chelsea
deserves to go free? If you haven’t done so yet, please write a short
letter to Maj. Gen. Buchanan. Hundreds of people have already submitted
letters for us to use, including Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel
Ellsberg and award-winning author Alice Walker.
As Alice Walker wrote:

Private Manning was the one soldier willing to speak out
against what he thought was wrong. When others silently followed orders,
Manning could not. Pvt. Manning is a humanist, meaning he sees humanity
before nationality, and values human life above all else. When he
released documents to WikiLeaks in 2010, he wanted the American people,
and the world, to judge for themselves if the U.S. military was properly
valuing human life in Iraq and Afghanistan. As taxpayers who fund that
military, we deserve that opportunity.

On
January 29, 2014 Lorenzo Johnson’s attorney, Michael Wiseman, met with
representatives of PA Attorney General Kathleen Kane to discuss the new
evidence of Lorenzo Johnson’s innocence contained in legal filings now
pending in the Pennsylvania courts. This includes affidavits confirming
Johnson’s presence in New York City at the time of the Harrisburg murder
and the identity of the actual killers, as well as police and
prosecutorial misconduct.

Attorney Wiseman said Kane’s office
promised to investigate these new facts in order to assess whether they
merit the relief that Lorenzo Johnson seeks in his PCRA petition.

Speaking
to AP reporter Mary Claire Dale on February 11, 2014 Wiseman said, “We
believe the witnesses we presented to them are credible, and give a
coherent version of the events. I take them at their word, that they’re
going to do a straightforward, honest review.” Kane spokesman Joe
Peters confirmed the meeting to AP “but said the office won’t comment on
the new evidence until the court filing,” (referring to the March 31,
2014 date for the AG’s response to Johnson’s October 2013 court filing).

It
is the Office of the PA Attorney General that is responsible for the
false prosecution of Lorenzo Johnson from trial through appeals. And
just a few months ago, the Attorney General’s office opposed a federal
petition based on this new evidence saying there was no prima facie
claim for relief. This resulted in the denial of Lorenzo Johnson’s
Motion to File a Second Writ of Habeas Corpus in the federal court.

On
December 18, 2013 a press conference called by the Campaign to Free
Lorenzo Johnson protested these actions of the PA Attorney General and
delivered petitions demanding dismissal of the charges and immediate
freedom for Lorenzo. Tazza, Lorenzo’s wife, declared, “1,000 signatures
means we are not in this alone…I won't stop until he’s home. There is
nothing and no one that can stop me from fighting for what’s right.”

This
is Lorenzo Johnson’s second fight for his innocence and freedom. In
January 2012, after 16 years of court battles to prove his innocence, a
federal appeals court held his sentence was based on insufficient
evidence – a judicial acquittal. Lorenzo was freed from prison. But
after a petition filed by the PA Attorney General the U.S. Supreme Court
reinstated Lorenzo Johnson’s conviction and he was re-incarcerated to
continue serving a life sentence without parole for a murder he did not
commit.

This innocent man drove himself back to prison in June
2012—after less than five months of freedom—leaving his new wife and
family, construction job and advocacy on behalf of others wrongfully
convicted. The reason Lorenzo Johnson voluntarily returned to prison?
Because he is innocent and fighting for full vindication.

In the
words of Lorenzo Johnson, “A second is too long to be in prison when
you are Innocent, so eighteen years … is Intolerable.”

Today
we issue an international call for Spring Days of Action—2014, a
coordinated campaign in April and May to end drone killings, drone
surveillance and global militarization.

The campaign will focus on drone bases, drone research facilities and test sites and drone manufacturers.

The campaign will provide information on:

1.
The suffering of tens-of-thousands of people in Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Yemen, Somalia and Gaza who are under drone attack, documenting the
killing, the wounding and the devastating impact of constant drone
surveillance on community life.

2. How attack and surveillance
drones have become a key element in a massive wave of surveillance,
clandestine military attacks and militarization generated by the United
States to protect a global system of manufacture and oil and mineral
exploitation that is creating unemployment and poverty, accelerating the
waste of nonrenewable resources and contributing to environmental
destruction and global warming.

In addition to cases in the
Middle East, Africa and Central Asia, we will examine President Obama’s
“pivot” into the Asia-Pacific, where the United States has already sold
and deployed drones in the vanguard of a shift of 60 percent of its
military forces to try to control China and to enforce the planned
Trans-Pacific Partnership. We will show, among other things, how this
surge of “pivot” forces, greatly enabled by drones, and supported by the
U.S. military-industrial complex, will hit every American community
with even deeper cuts in the already fragile social programs on which
people rely for survival. In short, we will connect drones and
militarization with “austerity” in America.

3. How drone attacks
have effectively destroyed international and domestic legal protection
of the rights to life, privacy, freedom of assembly and free speech and
have opened the way for new levels of surveillance and repression around
the world, and how, in the United States, increasing drone
surveillance, added to surveillance by the National Security Agency and
police, provides a new weapon to repress black, Hispanic, immigrant and
low-income communities and to intimidate Americans who are increasingly
unsettled by lack of jobs, economic inequality, corporate control of
politics and the prospect of endless war.

We will discuss how
the United States government and corporations conspire secretly to
monitor U.S. citizens and particularly how the Administration is
accelerating drone surveillance operations and surveillance inside the
United States with the same disregard for transparency and law that it
applies to other countries, all with the cooperation of the Congress.

The campaign will encourage activists around the world to win passage
of local laws that prohibit weaponized drones and drone surveillance
from being used in their communities as well as seeking national laws to
bar the use of weaponized drones and drone surveillance.

The campaign will draw attention to the call for a ban on weaponized drones by RootsAction.org that has generated a petition with over 80,000 signers:

Sireen
Khudairy was arrested again at 4am on Tuesday 7th January 2014. According to
reports she has been taken to Huwwara military point. When the Israeli army
took her from her home they didn't show any papers to her or the person she was
with.

This
follows eight months of harassment of this 24-year-old Palestinian woman who is
a teacher, activist and supporter of the non-violent action against the Israeli
occupation. She was previously imprisoned from May to July 2013, and has been
subjected to frequent harassment ever since. See further details at:

http://freesireen.wordpress.com

Please
help by contacting your Embassies urgently to demand her release and spread her
appeal widely. Follow updates on:

https://www.facebook.com/FreeSireenKhudiri?ref=hl

Please
contact us to let us know any action you take. We will pass this information on
to her family. Thanks for your solidarity and support.

Steven Katsineris, January 2014

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

U.S.
Court of Appeals Rules Against Lorenzo Johnson’s
New Legal Challenge to His Frame-up Conviction!
Demand the PA Attorney General Dismiss the Charges!
Free Lorenzo Johnson, Now!

The
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied Lorenzo Johnson’s motion to
file a Second Habeas Corpus Petition. The order contained the outrageous
declaration that Johnson hadn’t made a “prima facie case” that he had new
evidence of his innocence. This not only puts a legal obstacle in Johnson’s
path as his fight for freedom makes its way (again) through the state and
federal courts—but it undermines the newly filed Pennsylvania state appeal that
is pending in the Court of Common Pleas.

Stripped
of “legalese,” the court’s October 15, 2013 order says Johnson’s new
evidence was not brought into court soon enough—although it was the prosecution
and police who withheld evidence and coerced witnesses into lying or not coming
forward with the truth! This, despite over fifteen years and rounds of legal
battles to uncover the evidence of government misconduct. This is a set-back
for Lorenzo Johnson’s renewed fight for his freedom, but Johnson is even more
determined as his PA state court appeal continues.

Increased
public support and protest is needed. The fight for Lorenzo Johnson’s freedom
is not only a fight for this courageous man and family. The fight for Lorenzo
Johnson is also a fight for all the innocent others who have been framed and
are sitting in the slow death of prison. The PA Attorney General is directly
pursuing the charges against Lorenzo, despite the evidence of his innocence and
the corruption of the police. Free Lorenzo Johnson, Now!

—Rachel
Wolkenstein, Esq.

October 25, 2013

For
more on the federal court and PA state court legal filings.

Hear
Mumia’s latest commentary, “Cat Cries”

Go
to: www.FreeLorenzoJohnson.org for more information, to sign the petition, and
how to help.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

PUSH
CHELSEA'S JAILERS TO RESPECT HER IDENTITY

Call
and write Ft Leavenworth today and tell them to honor Manning's wishes around
her name and gender:

Call:
(913) 758-3600

Write
to:

Col.
Sioban Ledwith, Commander

U.S.
Detention Barracks

1301
N Warehouse Rd

Ft.
Leavenworth KS 66027

Private
Manning has been an icon both for the government transparency movement and
LGBTQ activists because of her fearlessness and acts of conscience. Now, as she
begins serving her sentence, Chelsea has asked for help with legal appeals,
family visits, education, and support for undergoing gender transition. The
latter is a decision she’s made following years of experiencing gender
dysphoria and examining her options. At a difficult time in her life, she
joined the military out of hope–the hope that she could use her service to save
lives, and also the hope that it would help to suppress her feelings of gender
dysphoria. But after serving time in Iraq, Private Manning realized what
mattered to her most was the truth, personal as well as political, even when it
proved challenging.

Now
she wants the Fort Leavenworth military prison to allow her access to hormone
replacement therapy which she has offered to pay for herself, as she pursues
the process to have her name legally changed to ‘Chelsea Elizabeth Manning.’

To
encourage the prison to honor her transgender identity, we’re calling on
progressive supporters and allies to contact Fort Leavenworth officials
demanding they acknowledge her requested name change immediately. Currently,
prison officials are not required to respect Chelsea’s identity, and can even
refuse to deliver mail addressed to the name ‘Chelsea Manning.’ However, it’s
within prison administrators’ power to begin using the name ‘Chelsea Manning’
now, in advance of the legal name change which will most likely be approved
sometime next year. It’s also up to these officials to approve Private
Manning’s request for hormone therapy.

Call:
(913) 758-3600

Write
to:

Col.
Sioban Ledwith, Commander

U.S.
Detention Barracks

1301
N Warehouse Rd

Ft.
Leavenworth KS 66027

Tell
them: “Transgender rights are human rights! Respect Private Manning’s identity
by acknowledging the name ‘Chelsea Manning’ whenever possible, including in
mail addressed to her, and by allowing her access to appropriate medical
treatment for gender dysphoria, including hormone replacement therapy (HRT).”

While
openly transgender individuals are allowed to serve in many other militaries
around the world, the US military continues to deny their existence. Now, by
speaking up for Chelsea’s right to treatment, you can support one brave
whistleblower in her personal struggle, and help set an important benchmark for
the rights of transgender individuals everywhere. (Remember that letters
written with focus and a respectful tone are more likely to be effective.) Feel
free to copy this sample letter.

Earlier
this year, the Private Manning Support Network won the title of most
“absolutely fabulous overall contingent” at the San Francisco Pride Parade, the
largest celebration of its kind for LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, Transgender
and Questioning) people nationwide. Over one thousand people marched for
Private Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning in that parade, to show LGBTQ
community pride for the Iraq War’s most well-known whistleblower.

Help
us continue to cover 100%
of Pvt. Manning's legal fees! Donate today.

We
are working to ensure that the ACCJC’s authority is not renewed by the
Department of Education this December when they are up for their 5-year
renewal. Our campaign made it possible for over 50 Third Party Comments to be
sent to the DOE re: the ACCJC. Our next step in this campaign is to send a
delegation from CCSF to Washington, D.C. to give oral comments at the hearing
on December 12th. We expect to have an array of forces aligned on the other
side who have much more money and resources than we do.

So
please support this effort to get ACCJC authority revoked!

LEGAL
CAMPAIGN

Save
CCSF members have been meeting with Attorney Dan Siegel since last May to
explore legal avenues to fight the ACCJC. After much consideration, and
consultation with AFT 2121’s attorney as well as the SF City Attorney’s office,
Dan has come up with a legal strategy that is complimentary to what is already
being pursued. In fact, AFT 2121’s attorney is encouraging us to go forward.

The
total costs of pursuing this (depositions, etc.) will be substantially more
than $15,000. However, Dan is willing to do it for a fixed fee of $15,000. He
will not expect a retainer, i.e. payment in advance, but we should start
payments ASAP. If we win the ACCJC will have to pay our costs.

PLEASE
HELP BOTH OF THESE IMPORTANT EFFORTS!

Checks
can be made out to Save CCSF Coalition with “legal” in the memo line and sent
to:

16
Years in Solitary Confinement Is Like a "Living Tomb"

American
Civil Liberties Union petition to end long-term solitary confinement:

California
Corrections Secretary Jeffrey Beard: We stand with the prisoners on hunger
strike. We urge you to comply with the US Commission on Safety and Abuse in
America’s Prisons 2006 recommendations regarding an end to long-term solitary
confinement.

In
California, hundreds of prisoners have been held in solitary for more than a
decade – some for infractions as trivial as reading Machiavelli's "The
Prince."

Gabriel
Reyes describes the pain of being isolated for at least 22 hours a day for the
last 16 years:

“Unless
you have lived it, you cannot imagine what it feels like to be by yourself,
between four cold walls, with little concept of time…. It is a living tomb …’ I
have not been allowed physical contact with any of my loved ones since 1995…I
feel helpless and hopeless. In short, I am being psychologically tortured.”

That’s
why over 30,000 prisoners in California began a hunger strike – the biggest the
state has ever seen. They’re refusing food to protest prisoners being held for
decades in solitary and to push for other changes to improve their basic
conditions.

California
Corrections Secretary Jeffrey Beard has tried to dismiss the strikers and
refuses to negotiate, but the media pressure is building through the strike. If
tens of thousands of us take action, we can help keep this issue in the
spotlight so that Secretary Beard can’t ignore the inhumane treatment of
prisoners.

Sign
the petition urging Corrections Secretary Beard to end the use of long-term
solitary confinement.

Solitary
is such an extreme form of punishment that a United Nations torture rapporteur
called for an international ban on the practice except in rare occasions.
Here’s why:

The
majority of the 80,000 people held in solitary in this country are severely
mentally ill or because of a minor infraction (it’s a myth that it’s only for
violent prisoners)

Even
for people with stable mental health, solitary causes severe psychological
reactions, often leading people to attempt suicide

It
jeopardizes public safety because prisoners held in solitary have a harder time
reintegrating into society.

And
to add insult to injury, the hunger strikers are now facing retaliation – their
lawyers are being restricted from visiting and the strikers are being punished.
But the media continues to write about the hunger strike and we can help keep
the pressure on Secretary Beard by signing this petition.

Sign
the petition urging Corrections Secretary Beard to end the use of long-term
solitary confinement.

Our
criminal justice system should keep communities safe and treat people fairly.
The use of solitary confinement undermines both of these goals – but little by
little, we can help put a stop to such cruelty.

Thank
you,

Anthony
for the ACLU Action team

P.S.
The hunger strikers have developed five core demands to address their basic
conditions, the main one being an end to long-term solitary confinement. They
are:

The
statement was read by Pfc. Bradley Manning at a providence inquiry for his
formal plea of guilty to one specification as charged and nine specifications
for lesser included offenses. He pled not guilty to 12 other specifications.
This rush transcript was taken by journalist Alexa O'Brien at Thursday's
pretrial hearing and first appeared on Salon.com.

You
Have the Right to Remain Silent: NLG Guide to Law Enforcement Encounters

Posted
1 day ago on July 27, 2012, 10:28 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

Occupy
Wall Street is a nonviolent movement for social and economic justice, but in
recent days disturbing reports have emerged of Occupy-affiliated activists
being targeted by US law enforcement, including agents from the FBI and
Department of Homeland Security. To help ensure Occupiers and allied activists
know their rights when encountering law enforcement, we are publishing in full
the National Lawyers Guild's booklet: You Have the Right to Remain Silent. The
NLG provides invaluable support to the Occupy movement and other activists –
please click here to support the NLG.

We
strongly encourage all Occupiers to read and share the information provided
below. We also recommend you enter the NLG's national hotline number
(888-654-3265) into your cellphone (if you have one) and keep a copy handy.
This information is not a substitute for legal advice. You should contact the
NLG or a criminal defense attorney immediately if you have been visited by the
FBI or other law enforcement officials. You should also alert your relatives,
friends, co-workers and others so that they will be prepared if they are
contacted as well.

You
Have the Right to Remain Silent: A Know Your Rights Guide for Law Enforcement
Encounters

What
Rights Do I Have?

Whether
or not you're a citizen, you have rights under the United States Constitution.
The Fifth Amendment gives every person the right to remain silent: not to
answer questions asked by a police officer or government agent. The Fourth
Amendment restricts the government's power to enter and search your home or
workplace, although there are many exceptions and new laws have expanded the
government's power to conduct surveillance. The First Amendment protects your
right to speak freely and to advocate for social change. However, if you are a
non-citizen, the Department of Homeland Security may target you based on your
political activities.

Standing
Up For Free Speech

The
government's crusade against politically-active individuals is intended to
disrupt and suppress the exercise of time-honored free speech activities, such
as boycotts, protests, grassroots organizing and solidarity work. Remember that
you have the right to stand up to the intimidation tactics of FBI agents and
other law enforcement officials who, with political motives, are targeting
organizing and free speech activities. Informed resistance to these tactics and
steadfast defense of your and others' rights can bring positive results. Each
person who takes a courageous stand makes future resistance to government oppression
easier for all. The National Lawyers Guild has a long tradition of standing up
to government repression. The organization itself was labeled a
"subversive" group during the McCarthy Era and was subject to FBI
surveillance and infiltration for many years. Guild attorneys have defended
FBI-targeted members of the Black Panther Party, the American Indian Movement,
and the Puerto Rican independence movement. The NLG exposed FBI surveillance,
infiltration and disruption tactics that were detailed during the 1975-76
COINTELPRO hearings. In 1989 the NLG prevailed in a lawsuit on behalf of
several activist organizations, including the Guild, that forced the FBI to
expose the extent to which it had been spying on activist movements. Under the
settlement, the FBI turned over roughly 400,000 pages of its files on the
Guild, which are now available at the Tamiment Library at New York University.

What
if FBI Agents or Police Contact Me?

What
if an agent or police officer comes to the door?

Do
not invite the agents or police into your home. Do not answer any questions.
Tell the agent that you do not wish to talk with him or her. You can state that
your lawyer will contact them on your behalf. You can do this by stepping
outside and pulling the door behind you so that the interior of your home or
office is not visible, getting their contact information or business cards and
then returning inside. They should cease questioning after this. If the agent
or officer gives a reason for contacting you, take notes and give the
information to your attorney. Anything you say, no matter how seemingly
harmless or insignificant, may be used against you or others in the future.
Lying to or misleading a federal agent is a crime. The more you speak, the more
opportunity for federal law enforcement to find something you said (even if not
intentionally) false and assert that you lied to a federal officer.

Do
I have to answer questions?

You
have the constitutional right to remain silent. It is not a crime to refuse to
answer questions. You do not have to talk to anyone, even if you have been
arrested or are in jail. You should affirmatively and unambiguously state that
you wish to remain silent and that you wish to consult an attorney. Once you
make the request to speak to a lawyer, do not say anything else. The Supreme
Court recently ruled that answering law enforcement questions may be taken as a
waiver of your right to remain silent, so it is important that you assert your
rights and maintain them. Only a judge can order you to answer questions. There
is one exception: some states have "stop and identify" statutes which
require you to provide identity information or your name if you have been
detained on reasonable suspicion that you may have committed a crime. A lawyer
in your state can advise you of the status of these requirements where you
reside.

Do
I have to give my name?

As
above, in some states you can be detained or arrested for merely refusing to
give your name. And in any state, police do not always follow the law, and
refusing to give your name may make them suspicious or more hostile and lead to
your arrest, even without just cause, so use your judgment. Giving a false name
could in some circumstances be a crime.

Do
I need a lawyer?

You
have the right to talk to a lawyer before you decide whether to answer
questions from law enforcement. It is a good idea to talk to a lawyer if you
are considering answering any questions. You have the right to have a lawyer
present during any interview. The lawyer's job is to protect your rights. Once
you tell the agent that you want to talk to a lawyer, he or she should stop
trying to question you and should make any further contact through your lawyer.
If you do not have a lawyer, you can still tell the officer you want to speak to
one before answering questions. Remember to get the name, agency and telephone
number of any investigator who visits you, and give that information to your
lawyer. The government does not have to provide you with a free lawyer unless
you are charged with a crime, but the NLG or another organization may be able
to help you find a lawyer for free or at a reduced rate.

If
I refuse to answer questions or say I want a lawyer, won't it seem like I have
something to hide?

Anything
you say to law enforcement can be used against you and others. You can never
tell how a seemingly harmless bit of information might be used or manipulated
to hurt you or someone else. That is why the right not to talk is a fundamental
right under the Constitution. Keep in mind that although law enforcement agents
are allowed to lie to you, lying to a government agent is a crime. Remaining
silent is not. The safest things to say are "I am going to remain
silent," "I want to speak to my lawyer," and "I do not consent
to a search." It is a common practice for law enforcement agents to try to
get you to waive your rights by telling you that if you have nothing to hide
you would talk or that talking would "just clear things up." The fact
is, if they are questioning you, they are looking to incriminate you or someone
you may know, or they are engaged in political intelligence gathering. You
should feel comfortable standing firm in protection and defense of your rights
and refusing to answer questions.

Can
agents search my home or office?

You
do not have to let police or agents into your home or office unless they have
and produce a valid search warrant. A search warrant is a written court order
that allows the police to conduct a specified search. Interfering with a
warrantless search probably will not stop it and you might get arrested. But
you should say "I do not consent to a search," and call a criminal
defense lawyer or the NLG. You should be aware that a roommate or guest can
legally consent to a search of your house if the police believe that person has
the authority to give consent, and your employer can consent to a search of
your workspace without your permission.

What
if agents have a search warrant?

If
you are present when agents come for the search, you can ask to see the
warrant. The warrant must specify in detail the places to be searched and the
people or things to be taken away. Tell the agents you do not consent to the
search so that they cannot go beyond what the warrant authorizes. Ask if you
are allowed to watch the search; if you are allowed to, you should. Take notes,
including names, badge numbers, what agency each officer is from, where they
searched and what they took. If others are present, have them act as witnesses
to watch carefully what is happening. If the agents ask you to give them
documents, your computer, or anything else, look to see if the item is listed
in the warrant. If it is not, do not consent to them taking it without talking
to a lawyer. You do not have to answer questions. Talk to a lawyer first.
(Note: If agents present an arrest warrant, they may only perform a cursory
visual search of the premises to see if the person named in the arrest warrant
is present.)

Do
I have to answer questions if I have been arrested?

No.
If you are arrested, you do not have to answer any questions. You should
affirmatively and unambiguously state that you wish to assert your right to
remain silent. Ask for a lawyer right away. Do not say anything else. Repeat to
every officer who tries to talk to or question you that you wish to remain
silent and that you wish to speak to a lawyer. You should always talk to a
lawyer before you decide to answer any questions.

What
if I speak to government agents anyway?

Even
if you have already answered some questions, you can refuse to answer other
questions until you have a lawyer. If you find yourself talking, stop. Assert
that you wish to remain silent and that you wish to speak to a lawyer.

What
if the police stop me on the street?

Ask
if you are free to go. If the answer is yes, consider just walking away. If the
police say you are not under arrest, but are not free to go, then you are being
detained. The police can pat down the outside of your clothing if they have
reason to suspect you might be armed and dangerous. If they search any more
than this, say clearly, "I do not consent to a search." They may keep
searching anyway. If this happens, do not resist because you can be charged
with assault or resisting arrest. You do not have to answer any questions. You
do not have to open bags or any closed container. Tell the officers you do not
consent to a search of your bags or other property.

What
if police or agents stop me in my car?

Keep
your hands where the police can see them. If you are driving a vehicle, you
must show your license, registration and, in some states, proof of insurance.
You do not have to consent to a search. But the police may have legal grounds
to search your car anyway. Clearly state that you do not consent. Officers may
separate passengers and drivers from each other to question them, but no one
has to answer any questions.

What
if I am treated badly by the police or the FBI?

Write
down the officer's badge number, name or other identifying information. You
have a right to ask the officer for this information. Try to find witnesses and
their names and phone numbers. If you are injured, seek medical attention and
take pictures of the injuries as soon as you can. Call a lawyer as soon as
possible.

What
if the police or FBI threaten me with a grand jury subpoena if I don't answer
their questions?

A
grand jury subpoena is a written order for you to go to court and testify about
information you may have. It is common for the FBI to threaten you with a
subpoena to get you to talk to them. If they are going to subpoena you, they
will do so anyway. You should not volunteer to speak just because you are
threatened with a subpoena. You should consult a lawyer.

What
if I receive a grand jury subpoena?

Grand
jury proceedings are not the same as testifying at an open court trial. You are
not allowed to have a lawyer present (although one may wait in the hallway and
you may ask to consult with him or her after each question) and you may be asked
to answer questions about your activities and associations. Because of the
witness's limited rights in this situation, the government has frequently used
grand jury subpoenas to gather information about activists and political
organizations. It is common for the FBI to threaten activists with a subpoena
in order to elicit information about their political views and activities and
those of their associates. There are legal grounds for stopping
("quashing") subpoenas, and receiving one does not necessarily mean
that you are suspected of a crime. If you do receive a subpoena, call the NLG
National Hotline at 888-NLG-ECOL (888-654-3265) or call a criminal defense
attorney immediately.

The
government regularly uses grand jury subpoena power to investigate and seek
evidence related to politically-active individuals and social movements. This
practice is aimed at prosecuting activists and, through intimidation and
disruption, discouraging continued activism.

Federal
grand jury subpoenas are served in person. If you receive one, it is critically
important that you retain the services of an attorney, preferably one who
understands your goals and, if applicable, understands the nature of your
political work, and has experience with these issues. Most lawyers are trained
to provide the best legal defense for their client, often at the expense of
others. Beware lawyers who summarily advise you to cooperate with grand juries,
testify against friends, or cut off contact with your friends and political
activists. Cooperation usually leads to others being subpoenaed and
investigated. You also run the risk of being charged with perjury, a felony,
should you omit any pertinent information or should there be inconsistencies in
your testimony.

Frequently
prosecutors will offer "use immunity," meaning that the prosecutor is
prohibited from using your testimony or any leads from it to bring charges
against you. If a subsequent prosecution is brought, the prosecutor bears the
burden of proving that all of its evidence was obtained independent of the
immunized testimony. You should be aware, however, that they will use anything
you say to manipulate associates into sharing more information about you by
suggesting that you have betrayed confidences.

In
front of a grand jury you can "take the Fifth" (exercise your right
to remain silent). However, the prosecutor may impose immunity on you, which
strips you of Fifth Amendment protection and subjects you to the possibility of
being cited for contempt and jailed if you refuse to answer further. In front
of a grand jury you have no Sixth Amendment right to counsel, although you can
consult with a lawyer outside the grand jury room after each question.

What
if I don't cooperate with the grand jury?

If
you receive a grand jury subpoena and elect to not cooperate, you may be held
in civil contempt. There is a chance that you may be jailed or imprisoned for
the length of the grand jury in an effort to coerce you to cooperate. Regular
grand juries sit for a basic term of 18 months, which can be extended up to a
total of 24 months. It is lawful to hold you in order to coerce your
cooperation, but unlawful to hold you as a means of punishment. In rare
instances you may face criminal contempt charges.

What
If I Am Not a Citizen and the DHS Contacts Me?

The
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is now part of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) and has been renamed and reorganized into: 1. The
Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS); 2. The Bureau of Customs
and Border Protection (CBP); and 3. The Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE). All three bureaus will be referred to as DHS for the
purposes of this pamphlet.

?
Assert your rights. If you do not demand your rights or if you sign papers
waiving your rights, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may deport you
before you see a lawyer or an immigration judge. Never sign anything without
reading, understanding and knowing the consequences of signing it.

?
Talk to a lawyer. If possible, carry with you the name and telephone number of
an immigration lawyer who will take your calls. The immigration laws are hard
to understand and there have been many recent changes. DHS will not explain
your options to you. As soon as you encounter a DHS agent, call your attorney.
If you can't do it right away, keep trying. Always talk to an immigration
lawyer before leaving the U.S. Even some legal permanent residents can be
barred from returning.

Based
on today's laws, regulations and DHS guidelines, non-citizens usually have the
following rights, no matter what their immigration status. This information may
change, so it is important to contact a lawyer. The following rights apply to
non-citizens who are inside the U.S. Non-citizens at the border who are trying
to enter the U.S. do not have all the same rights.

Do
I have the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any DHS questions or
signing any DHS papers?

Yes.
You have the right to call a lawyer or your family if you are detained, and you
have the right to be visited by a lawyer in detention. You have the right to
have your attorney with you at any hearing before an immigration judge. You do
not have the right to a government-appointed attorney for immigration
proceedings, but if you have been arrested, immigration officials must show you
a list of free or low cost legal service providers.

Should
I carry my green card or other immigration papers with me?

If
you have documents authorizing you to stay in the U.S., you must carry them
with you. Presenting false or expired papers to DHS may lead to deportation or
criminal prosecution. An unexpired green card, I-94, Employment Authorization
Card, Border Crossing Card or other papers that prove you are in legal status
will satisfy this requirement. If you do not carry these papers with you, you
could be charged with a crime. Always keep a copy of your immigration papers
with a trusted family member or friend who can fax them to you, if need be.
Check with your immigration lawyer about your specific case.

Am
I required to talk to government officers about my immigration history?

If
you are undocumented, out of status, a legal permanent resident (green card
holder), or a citizen, you do not have to answer any questions about your
immigration history. (You may want to consider giving your name; see above for
more information about this.) If you are not in any of these categories, and
you are being questioned by a DHS or FBI agent, then you may create problems
with your immigration status if you refuse to provide information requested by
the agent. If you have a lawyer, you can tell the agent that your lawyer will
answer questions on your behalf. If answering questions could lead the agent to
information that connects you with criminal activity, you should consider
refusing to talk to the agent at all.

If
I am arrested for immigration violations, do I have the right to a hearing
before an immigration judge to defend myself against deportation charges?

Yes.
In most cases only an immigration judge can order you deported. But if you
waive your rights or take "voluntary departure," agreeing to leave
the country, you could be deported without a hearing. If you have criminal
convictions, were arrested at the border, came to the U.S. through the visa
waiver program or have been ordered deported in the past, you could be deported
without a hearing. Contact a lawyer immediately to see if there is any relief
for you.

Can
I call my consulate if I am arrested?

Yes.
Non-citizens arrested in the U.S. have the right to call their consulate or to
have the police tell the consulate of your arrest. The police must let your
consulate visit or speak with you if consular officials decide to do so. Your
consulate might help you find a lawyer or offer other help. You also have the
right to refuse help from your consulate.

What
happens if I give up my right to a hearing or leave the U.S. before the hearing
is over?

You
could lose your eligibility for certain immigration benefits, and you could be
barred from returning to the U.S. for a number of years. You should always talk
to an immigration lawyer before you decide to give up your right to a hearing.

What
should I do if I want to contact DHS?

Always
talk to a lawyer before contacting DHS, even on the phone. Many DHS officers
view "enforcement" as their primary job and will not explain all of
your options to you.

What
Are My Rights at Airports?

IMPORTANT
NOTE: It is illegal for law enforcement to perform any stops, searches,
detentions or removals based solely on your race, national origin, religion,
sex or ethnicity.

If
I am entering the U.S. with valid travel papers can a U.S. customs agent stop
and search me?

Yes.
Customs agents have the right to stop, detain and search every person and item.

Can
my bags or I be searched after going through metal detectors with no problem or
after security sees that my bags do not contain a weapon?

Yes.
Even if the initial screen of your bags reveals nothing suspicious, the
screeners have the authority to conduct a further search of you or your bags.

If
I am on an airplane, can an airline employee interrogate me or ask me to get
off the plane?

The
pilot of an airplane has the right to refuse to fly a passenger if he or she
believes the passenger is a threat to the safety of the flight. The pilot's decision
must be reasonable and based on observations of you, not stereotypes.

What
If I Am Under 18?

Do
I have to answer questions?

No.
Minors too have the right to remain silent. You cannot be arrested for refusing
to talk to the police, probation officers, or school officials, except in some
states you may have to give your name if you have been detained.

What
if I am detained?

If
you are detained at a community detention facility or Juvenile Hall, you
normally must be released to a parent or guardian. If charges are filed against
you, in most states you are entitled to counsel (just like an adult) at no
cost.

Do
I have the right to express political views at school?

Public
school students generally have a First Amendment right to politically organize
at school by passing out leaflets, holding meetings, etc., as long as those
activities are not disruptive and do not violate legitimate school rules. You
may not be singled out based on your politics, ethnicity or religion.

Can
my backpack or locker be searched?

School
officials can search students' backpacks and lockers without a warrant if they
reasonably suspect that you are involved in criminal activity or carrying drugs
or weapons. Do not consent to the police or school officials searching your property,
but do not physically resist or you may face criminal charges.

Disclaimer

This
booklet is not a substitute for legal advice. You should contact an attorney if
you have been visited by the FBI or other law enforcement officials. You should
also alert your relatives, friends, co-workers and others so that they will be
prepared if they are contacted as well.

The
following link is to a short video which provides an overview of Al-Awda's

work
since the founding of our organization in 2000. This video was first shown

on
Saturday May 23, 2009 at the fundraising banquet of the 7th Annual Int'l

Al-Awda
Convention in Anaheim California. It was produced from footage collected

over
the past nine years.

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTiAkbB5uC0&eurl

Support
Al-Awda, a Great Organization and Cause!

Al-Awda,
The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, depends on your financial

support
to carry out its work.

To
submit your tax-deductible donation to support our work, go to

http://www.al-awda.org/donate.html

and
follow the simple instructions.

Thank
you for your generosity!

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

D.
VIDEO, FILM, AUDIO. ART, POETRY, ETC.:

[Some
of these videos are embeded on the BAUAW website:

http://bauaw.blogspot.com/
or bauaw.org ...bw]

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Checkpoint - Jasiri X

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq6Y6LSjulU

Published on Jan 28, 2014

"Checkpoint" is based on the
oppression and discrimination Jasiri X witnessed firsthand during his
recent trip to Palestine and Israel "Checkpoint" is produced by Agent of
Change, and directed by Haute Muslim. Download "Checkpoint" at https://jasirix.bandcamp.com/track/ch....

LYRICS
Journal of the hard times tales from the dark side
Evidence of the settlements on my hard drive
Man I swear my heart died at the end of that car ride
When I saw that checkpoint welcome to apartheid
Soldiers wear military green at the checkpoint
Automatic guns that's machine at the checkpoint
Tavors not m16s at the checkpoint
Fingers on the trigger you'll get leaned at the checkpoint
Little children grown adults or teens at the checkpoint
All ya papers better be clean at the checkpoint
You gotta but your finger on the screen at the checkpoint
And pray that red light turns green at the check point

If Martin Luther King had a dream of the checkpoint
He wake with loud screams from the scenes at the checkpoint
It's Malcolm X by any means at the check point
Imagine if you daily routine was the checkpoint

Separation walls that's surrounding the checkpoint
On top is barbwire like a crown on the checkpoint
Better have ya permits if your found at the checkpoint
Gunmen on the tower aiming down at the checkpoint
The idea is to keep you in fear of the checkpoint
You enter through the cage in the rear of the checkpoint
It feels like prison on a tier at the check point
I'd rather be anywhere but here at this checkpoint
Nelson Mandela wasn't blind to the check point
He stood for free Palestine not a check point
Support BDS don't give a dime to the checkpoint
This is international crime at the checkpoint
Arabs get treated like dogs at the checkpoint
Cause discrimination is the law at the checkpoint
Criminalized without a cause at the checkpoint
I'm just telling you what I saw at the checkpoint
Soldiers got bad attitudes at the checkpoint
Condescending and real rude at the checkpoint
Don't look em in they eyes when they move at the checkpoint
They might strip a man or woman nude at the checkpoint
Soldiers might blow you out of ya shoes at the checkpoint
Gas you up and then light the fuse at the checkpoint
Everyday you stand to be accused at the checkpoint
Each time your life you could lose at the checkpoint

If Martin Luther King had a dream of the checkpoint
He wake with loud screams from the scenes at the checkpoint
It's Malcolm X by any means at the check point
Imagine if you daily routine was the checkpoint

At the airport in Tel Aviv is a checkpoint
They pulled over our taxi at the checkpoint
Passport visa ID at the checkpoint
Soldiers going all through my things at the checkpoint
Said I was high risk security at the checkpoint
Because of the oppression I see at the checkpoint
Occupation in the 3rd degree at the checkpoint
All a nigga wanna do is leave fuck a checkpoint

On
Gun Control, Martin Luther King, the Deacons of Defense and the history of
Black Liberation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzYKisvBN1o&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Fukushima
Never Again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU-Z4VLDGxU

"Fukushima,
Never Again" tells the story of the Fukushima nuclear plant meltdowns in
north east Japan in March of 2011 and exposes the cover-up by Tepco and the
Japanese government.

This
is the first film that interviews the Mothers Of Fukushima, nuclear power
experts and trade unionists who are fighting for justice and the protection of
the children and the people of Japan and the world. The residents and citizens
were forced to buy their own geiger counters and radiation dosimeters in order
to test their communities to find out if they were in danger.

The
government said contaminated soil in children's school grounds was safe and
then

when
the people found out it was contaminated and removed the top soil, the
government and TEPCO refused to remove it from the school grounds.

It
also relays how the nuclear energy program for "peaceful atoms" was brought
to Japan under the auspices of the US military occupation and also the criminal
cover-up of the safety dangers of the plant by TEPCO and GE management which
built the plant in Fukushima. It also interviews Kei Sugaoka, the GE nulcear
plant inspector from the bay area who exposed cover-ups in the safety at the
Fukushima plant and was retaliated against by GE. This documentary allows the
voices of the people and workers to speak out about the reality of the disaster
and what this means not only for the people of Japan but the people of the
world as the US government and nuclear industry continue to push for more new
plants and government subsidies. This film breaks

the
information blockade story line of the corporate media in Japan, the US and
around the world that Fukushima is over.

Production
Of Labor Video Project

P.O.
Box 720027

San
Francisco, CA 94172

www.laborvideo.org

lvpsf@laborvideo.org

For
information on obtaining the video go to:

www.fukushimaneveragain.com

(415)282-1908

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1000
year of war through the world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiG8neU4_bs&feature=share

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Anatomy
of a Massacre - Afganistan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6BnRc11aug&feature=player_embedded

Afghans
accuse multiple soldiers of pre-meditated murder

To
see more go to http://www.youtube.com/user/journeymanpictures

Follow
us on Facebook (http://goo.gl/YRw42) or Twitter

(http://www.twitter.com/journeymanvod)

The
recent massacre of 17 civilians by a rogue US soldier has been shrouded in

mystery.
But through unprecedented access to those involved, this report

confronts
the accusations that Bales didn't act alone.

"They
came into my room and they killed my family". Stories like this are common

amongst
the survivors in Aklozai and Najiban. As are the shocking accusations

that
Sergeant Bales was not acting alone. Even President Karzai has announced

"one
man can not do that". Chief investigator, General Karimi, is suspicious

that
despite being fully armed, Bales freely left his base without raising

alarm.
"How come he leaves at night and nobody is aware? Every time we have

weapon
accountability and personal accountability." These are just a few of the

questions
the American army and government are yet to answer. One thing however

is
very clear, the massacre has unleashed a wave of grief and outrage which

means
relations in Kandahar will be tense for years to come: "If I could lay my

hands
on those infidels, I would rip them apart with my bare hands."

A
Film By SBS

Distributed
By Journeyman Pictures

April
2012

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Photo
of George Zimmerman, in 2005 photo, left, and in a more recent photo.